Hooper v. City of St. Paul
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
COYNE, Justice.
Plaintiffs David and Mary Brewer, as fee owners, and Alan Hooper, as contract vendee, instituted this action for a declaratory judgment that the use. of each of two structures situated on property commonly known as 387 Pelham Boulevard in St. Paul as a single family dwelling constitutes a valid nonconforming use under the Saint Paul Zoning Code. They appeal from the judgment of the Ramsey County District Court declaring that use of the premises for any purpose other than occupancy by a single family is unlawful. We reverse.
The property in question is a large, irregularly shaped…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- County of Freeborn v. ClaussenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1972
- Hawkins v. TalbotSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
- Carroll v. HurstAppellate Court of Illinois · 1982
- Board of Selectmen of Wrentham v. MonsonMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1969
3Cited by13 opinions
- Van Sant v. City of EverettCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1993
- Guy v. Town of TempleSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 2008
- Waikiki Marketplace Investment Co. v. Chair of Zoning Board of AppealsHawaii Intermediate Court of Appeals · 1997
- White v. City of Elk RiverSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2013
- County of Isanti v. PetersonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1991
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.