Legal Opinion · Dissent

Village of Burnsville v. Onischuk

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided September 13, 1974No. 44232, 44253Published

1DissentKelly, Justice

I concur in that portion of the majority opinion holding that Glen Northrup had standing but dissent to that part of the majority opinion holding that Ex. Sess. L. 1971, c. 24, the metropolitan fiscal disparities law, satisfies the requirements of Minn. Const, art. 9, § 1, that taxes shall be uniform upon the same class of subjects.

The trial court found, contrary to defendants’ assertion, that c. 24 did not establish the 7-county area as a taxing district. The legislature manifested no intent to do so. Chapter 24, as the court *162noted, requires the existing taxing districts to assume the burden…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co. v. StateWisconsin Supreme Court · 1906
  2. Visina v. FreemanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1958
  3. Village of Robbinsdale v. County of HennepinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1937

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API