Legal Opinion
In re Application of Skyline Materials, Ltd.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided August 21, 2013No. A11-2030PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ANDERSON, Justice.
The issue presented in this case is whether respondents properly served their notice of appeal of a variance decision by a county board of adjustment. Because we conclude that respondents’ service of process pursuant to Rule 5.02 of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure, rather than Rule 4.03, was ineffective to commence an action in the district court, we reverse and remand to the district court with instructions to dismiss respondents’ action for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
Respondents Michael and Diane Fields own property adjacent to property owned by…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Murphy Brothers, Inc. v. Michetti Pipe Stringing, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1999
- Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Doerr v. WarnerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1956
- Tullis v. Federated Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- SHAMROCK DEVELOPMENT, INC. v. SmithSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2008
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Hooper v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2013
- Steven J. Jaeger v. Palladium Holdings, LLC, Franklin Financial, LLCSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2016
- McCullough and Sons, Inc. v. City of Vadnais Heights, A14-1992Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2016
- Cox v. Mid-Minnesota Mut. Ins. Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2018
- Poppler v. Wright Hennepin Cooperative Electric Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2014
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.