Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State ex rel. Hilton v. Voll, 192 N.W. 188.

34 citing documents.

State ex rel. Commissioner of Transportation v. Kettleson 801 N.W.2d 160 Minn. 2011
State ex rel. Commissioner of Transportation v. Kettleson 801 N.W.2d 160 Minn. 2011
See State v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72, 76 , 192 N.W.
County of Hennepin v. Mikulay 194 N.W.2d 259 Minn. 1972
County of Hennepin v. Mikulay 194 N.W.2d 259 Minn. 1972
s issue this court may not interfere therewith.” Again, in State, by Lord, v. North Star Concrete Co. 265 Minn. 483, 486 , we said: “* * * The commissioner’s determinations with respect to the necessity, as well as the extent of the taking including the *210 interest to be acquired, are subject to a limited review by the courts.” See, also, State, by Hilton, v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72 , Packard v. County of Otter Tail, 174 Minn. 347 , Housing and Redevelopment Authority v. Minneapolis Metropolitan Co
State v. Christopher 170 N.W.2d 95 Minn. 1969
State v. Christopher 170 N.W.2d 95 Minn. 1969
maintenance of the trunk highway system in order to obtain the best results.’ Subject only to the requirement that he not act arbitrarily and capriciously, it is for the highway commissioner to say what land is necessary to the establishment and maintenance of the highway system.” The Kelmar Corp. v. District Court, 269 Minn. 137, 141 , 130 N. W. (2d) 228, 231 , citing State, by Hilton, v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72, 75 , .
State v. Wren, Inc. 146 N.W.2d 547 Minn. 1966
State v. Wren, Inc. 146 N.W.2d 547 Minn. 1966
State, by Hilton, v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72 , ; Burnquist v. Cook, 220 Minn. 48 , 19 N. W. (2d) 394 ; State ex rel.
State v. Gannons Inc. 145 N.W.2d 321 Minn. 1966
State v. Gannons Inc. 145 N.W.2d 321 Minn. 1966
See, State, by Hilton v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72 , 192 N.W.
State v. Gannons Inc. 145 N.W.2d 321 Minn. 1966
State v. Gannons Inc. 145 N.W.2d 321 Minn. 1966
See, State v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72 , ; State v. Erickson, 185 Minn. 60 , ; Housing and Redevelopment Authority v. Minneapolis Metropolitan Co. 259 Minn. 1 , 104 N. W. (2d) 864 ; State, by Mondale, v. Ohman, 263 Minn. 115 , 116 N. W. (2d) 101 .
The Kelmar Corp. v. District Court 130 N.W.2d 228 Minn. 1964
The Kelmar Corp. v. District Court 130 N.W.2d 228 Minn. 1964
161.20 to acquire all lands and properties necessary “in laying out” and “constructing * * * the trunk highway system.” In State, by Hilton, v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72, 75 , , we pointed out that it was the intention of the legislature to delegate to the commissioner “plenary and final power * * * in all that relates to the location, construction, and maintenance of the trunk highway system in order to obtain the *142 best results.” Subject only to the requirement
State v. Ohman 116 N.W.2d 101 Minn. 1962
State v. Ohman 116 N.W.2d 101 Minn. 1962
161.20 that the commissioner of highways has been vested by the legislature with the authority to designate and acquire through condemnation proceedings lands needed for trunk highway purposes, State, by Hilton, v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72 , ; Burnquist v. Cook, 220 Minn. 48 , 19 N. W. (2d) 394 ; that in so acting, he is acting for the state in its sovereign capacity, State, by Burnquist v. Flach, 213 Minn. 353 , 6 N. W. (2d) 805 ; that such authority includes the right to take from adjacent landowner
State ex rel. Peterson v. Anderson 69 N.W.2d 688 Minn. 1955
State ex rel. Peterson v. Anderson 69 N.W.2d 688 Minn. 1955
v. Roselawn Cemetery, 138 Minn. 458 , , in support thereof; and therefore that the order here should be subject to review under § 605.09 (7) as a final order similar to that involved in State, by Hilton, v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72 , , and State ex rel.
State, by Peterson v. Anderson 19 N.W.2d 70 Minn. 1945
State, by Peterson v. Anderson 19 N.W.2d 70 Minn. 1945
In our opinion, State, by Hilton, v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72 , , offers no obstacle to the theory of mandamus to the commissioner of higliAvays to compel him to start condemnation proceedings to acquire land or easements when property is taken or damaged.
Burnquist v. Cook 19 N.W.2d 394 Minn. 1945
Burnquist v. Cook 19 N.W.2d 394 Minn. 1945
"We have construed this provision in State, by Hilton, v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72, 74 , , as follows: “* * * From these various provisions the conclusion is unavoidable that the legislature vested in the commissioner of high *59 ways the power and authority to designate the particular land needed for the right of way for a trunk highway.
State Ex Rel. Peterson v. Bentley 12 N.W.2d 347 Minn. 1943
State Ex Rel. Peterson v. Bentley 12 N.W.2d 347 Minn. 1943
509 , supra; State, by Hilton, v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72 , 192 N.W.
State Ex Rel. Petterson v. Werder 273 N.W. 714 Minn. 1937
State Ex Rel. Petterson v. Werder 273 N.W. 714 Minn. 1937
All that is said in State, by Hilton, v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72, 73 , , when properly applied to its subject matter, confirms rather than impairs our present conclusion.
State Ex Rel. Benson v. Stanley 247 N.W. 509 Minn. 1933
State Ex Rel. Benson v. Stanley 247 N.W. 509 Minn. 1933
Smith v. Van Reed, 125 Minn. 194 , ; State, by Hilton, v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72 , ; State, by Benson, v. Erickson, 185 Minn. 60 , ; 2 Dunnell, Minn. Dig.
State Ex Rel. Benson v. Erickson 239 N.W. 908 Minn. 1931
State Ex Rel. Benson v. Erickson 239 N.W. 908 Minn. 1931
In the case of State v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72 , , this court used some language which if taken aAvay from the context and viewed Avithout reference to the question which was then before the court Avould indicate that the court viewed the order designating the route of the trunk highway as a taking of the land over which the highway was routed.
State, by Hilton v. Lambert 214 N.W. 653 Minn. 1927
State, by Hilton v. Lambert 214 N.W. 653 Minn. 1927
Under authority of art. 16 of our constitution a trunk highway system was provided by L. 1921, p. 406, c. 323 (G. S. 1923, c. 13); State, by Clifford L. Hilton v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72 , .
Automatic Signal Advertising Co. v. Babcock 208 N.W. 132 Minn. 1926
Automatic Signal Advertising Co. v. Babcock 208 N.W. 132 Minn. 1926
State v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72 , .

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by