Woodhall v. State
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Dissent
ANDERSON, PAUL H„ Justice
(dissenting).
I respectfully dissent. For the reasons set forth in my special concurrence in Hous. & Redevelopment Auth. ex rel. City of Richfield v. Adelmann, 590 N.W.2d 327 (Minn.1999) (Anderson, Paul H., J., concurring specially), I disagree with the majority’s conclusion that the district court has lost subject matter jurisdiction in this matter. Therefore, I would reverse and let this case proceed.
We need to be very cautious about how we treat the rights of persons when we apply the Takings Clauses which are more accurately described as the Eminent Domain Clauses…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- State v. RustSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1959
- Housing & Redevelopment Authority ex rel. City of Richfield v. AdelmannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
- State v. JudeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1960