Cited by

The rule governing that situation is stated in the case of Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383, 390 , , as follows: “ * * It was not, however, intended or expected that the courts would, on such appeal, hold fatal all informalities or defects; on the contrary, the statute should be construed as vesting in the court jurisdiction to determine whether any essential jurisdictional requirement had

What is for the best interests of the people of a particular territory is a practical, not a legal, question, the solution of which involves a consideration of the interests of the whole territory.” This court in Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383, 387 , , said: “* * * The court will * * * in determining whether the best interests of the territory affected justify a particular consolidation, limit its inquiry to the question whether the proceedings were arbitrary, resulting in unnecessary injus

Decisions of this court considered in arriving at our decision include: Hamilton v. Village of Detroit, 85 Minn. 83 , ; Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383 , ; In re Order of Sammons, 242 Minn. 345 , 65 N. W. (2d) 198 ; In re Certain School Dists., Freeborn County, 246 Minn. 96 , 74 N. W. (2d) 410 ; State ex rel.

Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383, 387 , ; Village of Blaine v. Independent School Dist.

See, Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383 , .

No. 46, 242 Minn. 320 , 65 N. W. (2d) 117 ; Peiper v. County Superintendent, 130 Minn. 54 , ; Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383 , .

No. 46, 242 Minn. 320 , 65 N. W. (2d) 117 ; Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383 , .

131 Minn. 79 , ; Annotations, 65 A. L. R. 1529, 1531, 1532, and 135 A. L. R. 1107, 1111; Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383 , ; Irons v. Independent School Dist.

16 See, In re Contest of Election of Vetsch, 245 Minn. 229, 238 , 71 N. W. (2d) 652, 658 ; Taylor v. Taylor, 10 Minn. 81 (107); McEwen v. Prince, 125 Minn. 417 , ; Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383 , ; Clayton v. Prince, 129 Minn. 118 , ; Ferguson v. City of Morris, 197 Minn. 446 , ; 6 Dunnell, Dig.

The question of allowance of costs and disbursements in this court is controlled by our decision in Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383 , .

Inasmuch as the action of such agency is legislative, the contention that to permit the court to determine whether such action is for the best interests of the territory affected permits the courts to invade the legislative field and thereby run afoul of the constitution is, as we said in Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383, 387 , 142 N.W.

8 Inasmuch as the action of such agency is legislative,.the contention that to permit the court to determine whether such action is for the best interests of the territory affected permits the courts to invade the legislative field and thereby run afoul of the constitution is, as we said in Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383, 387 , , not without merit.

[2] See, Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383, 388 , 142 N.W.

Peiper v. County Superintendent, 130 Minn. 54 , ; Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383 , .

No. 68, supra; Clayton v. Prince, 129 Minn. 118 , ; McEwen v. Prince, 125 Minn. 417 , ; Backus v. City of Virginia, 123 Minn. 48 , ; Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383 , ; Pennington v. Hare, 60 Minn. 146 , ; Edson v. Child, 18 Minn. 43 (64); Taylor v. Taylor, 10 Minn. 81 (107).

The rule governing that situation is stated in the case of Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383, 390 , 142 N.W.

The rule governing that situation is stated in the case of Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383, 390 , , as follows: *240 “* * * It was not, however, intended or expected that the courts would, on such appeal, hold fatal all informalities or defects; on the contrary, the statute should be construed as vesting in the court jurisdiction to determine whether any essential jurisdictional requireme

The iden *43 tical question arose in Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383, 389 , .

133 ; Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383 , 392 , 142 N.W.

In Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383, 392 , , it was held that costs and disbursements were not taxable against the county superintendent of schools in litigation involving the validity *334 of consolidated school proceedings because he was performing his official duties while acting for the state.

Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383 , ; Hunstiger v. Kilian, 130 Minn. 474 , ; Diamond v. City of Mankato, 89 Minn. 48 , , 61 L. R. A. 448; Sorknes v. Commrs.

Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383 , ; Hunstiger v. Kilian, 130 Minn. 474 , ; Sorknes v. Board, 131 Minn. 79 , ; School District v. School District, 134 Minn. 82 , ; Farrell v. County of Sibley, 135 Minn. 439 , ; Brazil v. County of Sibley, 139 Minn. 458 , ; Froe

Koochiching Co. v. Franson, 91 Minn. 404 , ; Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383, 386 , .

Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383 , ; In re Consolidation of School Districts in Blue Earth County, 140 Minn. 475 , .

The case is, for manifest reasons, different from cases like Schweigert v. Abbott, 122 Minn. 383 , , and Sorknes v. Board of County Commrs.