Northern States Power Co. v. Minnesota Metropolitan Council
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HUDSON, Judge.
Appellant Northern States Power, now known as Xcel Energy, challenges the district court’s dismissal of its writ of mandamus. Xcel Energy argues the district court erred by holding that (1) there is no factual dispute in this matter; (2) Xcel Energy’s claim is premature and speculative; and (3) Xcel Energy has an adequate legal remedy. Appellant also argues that the district court improperly considered evidence outside the four corners of Xcel Energy’s verified petition. We reverse and remand.
FACTS
The Hiawatha Light Rail Transit project (LRT) is an 11.6-mile mass-transit…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Cooper v. FrenchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
- Fabio v. BellomoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
- DLH, Inc. v. RussSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- Elzie v. Commissioner of Public SafetySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- Hendrickson v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1964
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Northern States Power Co. v. Minnesota Metropolitan CouncilSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
- Larson v. WasemillerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2006
- Northern States Power Company v. MINNESOTA METROPOLITAN COUNCILSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004