Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 108 N.W. 480.

47 citing documents.

Hader Properties, LLC, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
A property owner has “an easement in the street” abutting their property as a “right of access” to the property “in any direction [that] the street permits.”
Kick's Liquor Store, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis 587 N.W.2d 57 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Kick's Liquor Store, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis 587 N.W.2d 57 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
See Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329, 335 , 108 N.W.
State v. Kohler 128 N.W.2d 90 Minn. 1964
State v. Kohler 128 N.W.2d 90 Minn. 1964
age road which ends in a cul-de-sac, thereby substantially impairing the owner’s ingress to and egress from the property, without compensating the landowner for the resulting reduction in value of his land?” The appellant in its brief and argument relies on authorities to the effect that a property owner left abutting on a cul-de-sac may recover damages, citing Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , , 6 L. R. A. (N.S.)
Wolfram v. State Ex Rel. Burnquist 74 N.W.2d 510 Minn. 1956
Wolfram v. State Ex Rel. Burnquist 74 N.W.2d 510 Minn. 1956
Collins v. Village of Richfield, 238 Minn. 87 , 55 N. W. (2d) 628 ; Dickerman v. City of Duluth, 88 Minn. 288 , ; Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 93 Minn. 81 , ; Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , , 6 L.R.A.
Electric Short Line Terminal Co. v. City of Minneapolis 64 N.W.2d 149 Minn. 1954
Electric Short Line Terminal Co. v. City of Minneapolis 64 N.W.2d 149 Minn. 1954
3 Dickerman v. City of Duluth, 88 Minn. 288 , ; Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 93 Minn. 81 , ; Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , , 6 L.R.A.(N.S.)
Collins v. Village of Richfield 55 N.W.2d 628 Minn. 1952
Collins v. Village of Richfield 55 N.W.2d 628 Minn. 1952
Dickerman v. City of Duluth, 88 Minn. 288 , ; Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 93 Minn. 81 , ; Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , , 6 L.R.A.
Poynter v. County of Otter Tail 25 N.W.2d 708 Minn. 1947
Underwood v. Town Board of Empire 14 N.W.2d 459 Minn. 1944
Underwood v. Town Board of Empire 14 N.W.2d 459 Minn. 1944
In re Application of Hull for Vacation of Part of Plat of Hibbing, 163 Minn. 439 , , , 49 A. L. R. 320 (writ of error dismissed, 275 U. S. 491 , 48 S. Ct. 33 , 72 L. ed. 390); Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , , 6 L.R.A.(N.S.)
Locascio v. Northern Pacific Railway Co. 240 N.W. 661 Minn. 1932
Locascio v. Northern Pacific Railway Co. 240 N.W. 661 Minn. 1932
Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , , 6 L.R.A.(N.S.)
Foss v. City of Montevideo 227 N.W. 357 Minn. 1929
Foss v. City of Montevideo 227 N.W. 357 Minn. 1929
790, 120 A. S. R. 635; Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , , 6 L.R.A.(N.S.)
Maguire v. Village of Crosby 226 N.W. 398 Minn. 1929
Maguire v. Village of Crosby 226 N.W. 398 Minn. 1929
Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , ; 6 L.R.A.
Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. v. City of Minneapolis 205 N.W. 640 Minn. 1925
Vacation of Part of Town of Hibbing 204 N.W. 534 Minn. 1925
In re Hull 163 Minn. 439 Minn. 1925
In re Hull 163 Minn. 439 Minn. 1925
Suburbs Co. 119 Minn. 77 , ; Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , , 6 L. R. A. (N. S.) 741; Maletta v. Oliver Iron Min.
Vacation of Part of Town of Hibbing 204 N.W. 534 Minn. 1925
395 ; Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , 108 N.W.
Bennett v. Beaty 194 N.W. 627 Minn. 1923
Bennett v. Beaty 194 N.W. 627 Minn. 1923
Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 93 Minn. 81 , ; Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , , 6 L. R. A. (N. S.) 741.
Thorpe v. City of Ada 162 N.W. 886 Minn. 1917
Thorpe v. City of Ada 162 N.W. 886 Minn. 1917
557, and Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , , 6 L.R.A.
Maletta v. Oliver Iron Mining Co. 160 N.W. 771 Minn. 1916
Maletta v. Oliver Iron Mining Co. 160 N.W. 771 Minn. 1916
His situation is like that of the plaintiff in Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , , 6 L.R.A.(N.S.)
Austin v. Village of Tonka Bay 153 N.W. 738 Minn. 1915
Austin v. Village of Tonka Bay 153 N.W. 738 Minn. 1915
In Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , it is said at page 338 [ , 6 L.R.A.(N.S.)
Anderson v. Landers-Morrison-Christenson Co. 149 N.W. 669 Minn. 1914
Anderson v. Landers-Morrison-Christenson Co. 149 N.W. 669 Minn. 1914
Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , , 6 L.R.A.(N.S.)
Matthias v. Minneapolis, St. Pahl & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co. 146 N.W. 353 Minn. 1914
Matthias v. Minneapolis, St. Pahl & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co. 146 N.W. 353 Minn. 1914
Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , , 6 L.R.A.(N.S.)
Painter v. Gunderson 143 N.W. 910 Minn. 1913
Painter v. Gunderson 143 N.W. 910 Minn. 1913
1126, and Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , , 6 L.R.A.(N.S.)
Steenerson v. Fontaine 119 N.W. 400 Minn. 1908
Steenerson v. Fontaine 119 N.W. 400 Minn. 1908
In construing Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , , 6 L. R. A. (N. S.) 741, the court pointed out, in State v. Board, 100 Minn. 150, 157 , , 9 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1045: “The authority to vacate public parks, streets, and parkways being legislative, it is beyond the power of the court to set aside the action of the board in vacating the par
Fitzer v. St. Paul City Railway Co. 117 N.W. 434 Minn. 1908
Fitzer v. St. Paul City Railway Co. 117 N.W. 434 Minn. 1908
The situation is similar to the facts in Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , , 6 L. R. A. (N. S.) 741.
Sallden v. City of Little Falls 113 N.W. 884 Minn. 1907
Sallden v. City of Little Falls 113 N.W. 884 Minn. 1907
Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , , 6 L. R. A. (N. S.) 741.
State ex rel. Townsend v. Board of Park Commissioners 110 N.W. 1121 Minn. 1907
State ex rel. Townsend v. Board of Park Commissioners 110 N.W. 1121 Minn. 1907
The case is similar, from the' standpoint of the legal rights of the parties, to Vanderburgh v. City of Minneapolis, 98 Minn. 329 , .