Legal Opinion

Foote v. City of Crosby

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided June 19, 1981No. 50574PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

TODD, Justice.

Defendant City of Crosby appeals from an order of the Crow Wing County District Court refusing to dissolve a temporary injunction and making that temporary injunction permanent. The sole issue on appeal is whether the trial court erred by enjoining the city from removing shade trees located within the platted right-of-way of a city street as part of a municipal street improvement project. The trial court’s injunction was based on the theory that the removal of the trees constituted a compen-sable taking and that, therefore, condemnation proceedings must be commenced to prevent…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Sallden v. City of Little FallsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1907
  2. City of Rochester v. North Side CorporationSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1941
  3. West v. Village of White BearSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1909
  4. Kochevar v. City of GilbertSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1966
  5. Pederson v. City of RushfordSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Voluntary Dissolution of Quintar, Inc. v. MBC, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
  2. Edgewater Cottage Ass'n, Inc. v. WatsonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
  3. Miller-Lagro v. Northern States Power Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
  4. Neighborhood Preservation Ass'n of Detroit Lakes v. City of Detroit LakesCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
  5. Foote v. City of CrosbySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API