Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Housing & Redevelopment Authority ex rel. City of Richfield v. Adelmann

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided March 25, 1999No. Nos. C2-97-980, C7-97-1199, C6-97-1811Published

1ConcurrencePaul H. Anderson, J.

I concur in the result reached by the majority, but write separately to address the underlying issue of subject-matter jurisdiction. My hope is that by addressing this issue, we can resolve ambiguities and misunderstandings created by prior opinions of our court and the Minnesota Court of Appeals.

For well over a century, it has been our position that a district court acquires subject-matter jurisdiction over eminent domain proceedings upon the presentation to the court of a proper condemnation petition showing a right on the part of the petitioner to acquire the land described in the…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. State, by Lord v. FrisbySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1961
  2. State v. RustSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1959
  3. State v. RadosevichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1957
  4. Oronoco School District v. Town of OronocoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
  5. Whitely v. Mississippi Water Power & Boom Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1888

11 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