Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Northwestern Telephone Exchange Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 83 N.W. 527.

27 citing documents.

Northern States Power Co. v. City of Oakdale 588 N.W.2d 534 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Northern States Power Co. v. City of Oakdale 588 N.W.2d 534 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140, 149-50 , 83 N.W.
Lockway v. Proulx 166 N.W.2d 79 Minn. 1969
Lockway v. Proulx 166 N.W.2d 79 Minn. 1969
Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140 , , , 53 L. R. A. 175) and that a sidewalk is considered a part of a street.
Burnquist v. Cook 19 N.W.2d 394 Minn. 1945
Union Public Service Co. v. Village of Minneota 2 N.W.2d 555 Minn. 1942
Union Public Service Co. v. Village of Minneota 2 N.W.2d 555 Minn. 1942
Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140 , , , 53 L. R. A. 175 (on reargument); Dimond v. Manheim, 61 Minn. 178 , .
Larson v. Lowden 282 N.W. 669 Minn. 1938
Larson v. Lowden 282 N.W. 669 Minn. 1938
Northwestern T. E. Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140 , , , 53 L. R. A. 175; Evison v. C. St.
State Fire Marshal v. Sherman 277 N.W. 249 Minn. 1938
State Fire Marshal v. Sherman 277 N.W. 249 Minn. 1938
Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140 , , , 53 L. R. A. 175.” (State Fire Marshal v. Fitzpatrick, 149 Minn. 203, 205-206 , .)
Schultz v. City of Duluth 203 N.W. 449 Minn. 1925
Schultz v. City of Duluth 203 N.W. 449 Minn. 1925
Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140 , , , 53 L. R. A. 175.
State Fire Marshal v. Fitzpatrick 183 N.W. 141 Minn. 1921
State Fire Marshal v. Fitzpatrick 183 N.W. 141 Minn. 1921
Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140 , , , 53 L.R.A.
Duluth Terminal Railway Co. v. City of Duluth 130 N.W. 18 Minn. 1911
Duluth Terminal Railway Co. v. City of Duluth 130 N.W. 18 Minn. 1911
Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140 , , , 53 L.R.A.
Northwestern Telephone Exchange Co. v. Twin City Telephone Co. 95 N.W. 460 Minn. 1903
Northwestern Telephone Exchange Co. v. Twin City Telephone Co. 95 N.W. 460 Minn. 1903
Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140 , , .
Lerch v. City of Duluth 92 N.W. 1116 Minn. 1903
Lerch v. City of Duluth 92 N.W. 1116 Minn. 1903
Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140 , , ; City of Duluth v. Duluth Tel.
State ex rel. Utick v. Board of County Commissioners 92 N.W. 216 Minn. 1902
State ex rel. Utick v. Board of County Commissioners 92 N.W. 216 Minn. 1902
Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140 , , , where the relief sought was to restrain the municipal authorities from the exercise of the police power, — far broader and more comprehensive than an exercise of the power of eminent domain, — on the ground that its threatened exercise was arbitrary and unnecessary.
State ex rel. Freeman v. Zimmerman 90 N.W. 783 Minn. 1902
State ex rel. Freeman v. Zimmerman 90 N.W. 783 Minn. 1902
Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140 , , ; 18 Am.
City of Duluth v. Duluth Telephone Co. 87 N.W. 1127 Minn. 1901
City of Duluth v. Duluth Telephone Co. 87 N.W. 1127 Minn. 1901
All of these propositions were involved and necessarily decided in the case of N. W. T. E. Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 81 Minn. 140 , , , and there only remains for us an appli *490 cation of the principles announced in that case to the facts in this controversy.