Village of Brooklyn Center v. Rippen
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1DissentMurphy, Justice
I think the trial court should be affirmed. It is obvious from the record that because of the use of waters within its municipal limits for such activities as water skiing, surfboard riding, and the operation of speedboats the village council was faced with a real problem in maintaining the safety and good order of the community. The general-welfare clause, as expressed in M. S. A. 412.221, subd. 32, is intended to empower the village council with authority to meet new conditions as they arise. Since the ordinance in question has application to the use of a limited area of water within the…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Bridgeman v. City of DerbySupreme Court of Connecticut · 1926
- In re WilsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1884
- City of St. Paul v. DalsinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
- City of Duluth v. CervenySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
- Nelson v. DelongSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.