DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite City of Rochester v. North Side Corporation, 1 N.W.2d 361.

30 citing documents.

  • Terry L. Smeby, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
  • Heuer v. County of Aitkin 645 N.W.2d 753 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
  • Heuer v. County of Aitkin 645 N.W.2d 753 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
    See City of Rochester v. N. Side Corp., 211 Minn. 276, 280-81 , -64 (1941) (where rights claimed by an individual were exercised in good faith and held adversely to a city’s rights, it would be inequitable for the city to be able to enforce its rights after remaining silent for over 83 years and benefiting from the individual’s use).
  • Reads Landing Campers Ass'n v. Township of Pepin 546 N.W.2d 10 Minn. 1996
  • Reads Landing Campers Ass'n v. Township of Pepin 546 N.W.2d 10 Minn. 1996
    Combining the holdings in Village of Newport v. Taylor, 225 Minn. 299 , and City of Rochester v. North Side Corp., 211 Minn. 276 , the court established the five elements necessary to prove abandonment of public, dedicated property: [A]n estoppel arises where there is long-continued nonuser by the municipality, together with the possession by private parties in good faith and in the belief that its use as a street has been
  • Wolfson v. City of St. Paul 535 N.W.2d 384 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
  • Wolfson v. City of St. Paul 535 N.W.2d 384 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
    City of Rochester v. North Side Corp., 211 Minn. 276, 279
  • Fischer v. City of Sauk Rapids 325 N.W.2d 816 Minn. 1982
  • Fischer v. City of Sauk Rapids 325 N.W.2d 816 Minn. 1982
    In City of Rochester v. North Side Corp., 211 Minn. 276 , the court found a rare example of estoppel.
  • Halverson v. Village of Deerwood 322 N.W.2d 761 Minn. 1982
  • Halverson v. Village of Deerwood 322 N.W.2d 761 Minn. 1982
    We set forth the general rule for estopping a municipality from asserting its interest in a dedicated street in City of Rochester v. North Side Corp., 211 Minn. 276 , : [A]n estoppel arises where there is long-continued nonuser by the municipality, together with the possession by private parties in good faith and in the belief that its use as a street has been abandoned, and the erection of valuable improvements thereon without objection from the municipality
  • Foote v. City of Crosby 306 N.W.2d 883 Minn. 1981
  • Foote v. City of Crosby 306 N.W.2d 883 Minn. 1981
    In City of Rochester v. North Side Corp., 211 Minn. 276 , this court found abandonment of a city street where the street remained unopened for 83 years, the street actually used was located to the north of the platted street, and the landowner had constructed permanent improvements on the platted street with the city’s approval.
  • Township of Sterling v. Griffin 244 N.W.2d 129 Minn. 1976
  • Township of Sterling v. Griffin 244 N.W.2d 129 Minn. 1976
    * * *” 5 See, State v. Marcks, 228 Minn. 129 , City of Rochester v. North Side Corp. 211 Minn. 276
  • Village of Medford v. Wilson 230 N.W.2d 458 Minn. 1975
  • Village of Medford v. Wilson 230 N.W.2d 458 Minn. 1975
    Village of Newport v. Taylor, 225 Minn. 299 , City of Rochester v. North Side Corp. 211 Minn. 276 , Pierro v. City of Minneapolis, 139 Minn. 394 , Minn. St.
  • Sullivan v. Credit River Township 217 N.W.2d 502 Minn. 1974
  • Magnuson v. City of White Bear Lake 203 N.W.2d 848 Minn. 1973
  • Magnuson v. City of White Bear Lake 203 N.W.2d 848 Minn. 1973
    County of Houston v. Burns, 126 Minn. 206 , City of Rochester v. North Side Corp. 211 Minn. 276
  • Rein v. Town of Spring Lake 145 N.W.2d 537 Minn. 1966
  • Rein v. Town of Spring Lake 145 N.W.2d 537 Minn. 1966
    The trial court in its memorandum considered that the general rules applicable to the issue of abandonment of public streets were properly stated in City of Rochester v. North Side Corp., 211 Minn. 276 , , and Dabney v. City of Portland, 124 Ore.
  • Rein v. Town of Spring Lake 145 N.W.2d 537 Minn. 1966
  • Rein v. Town of Spring Lake 145 N.W.2d 537 Minn. 1966
    The trial court in its memorandum considered that the general rules applicable to the issue of abandonment of public streets were properly stated in City of Rochester v. North Side Corp. 211 Minn. 276 , 1 N. W. (2d) 361 , and Dabney v. City of Portland, 124 Ore.
  • Neill v. Hake 93 N.W.2d 821 Minn. 1958
  • Neill v. Hake 93 N.W.2d 821 Minn. 1958
    While it has been held that a municipality may be estopped from asserting rights in a public highway where, by affirmative actions, it has permitted others to assume that it had been abandoned for highway purposes so that they were authorized to construct buñdings and structures thereon (State, by Burnquist, v. Marcks, supra; City of Rochester v. North Side Corp. 211 Minn. 276 , 1 N. W. [2d] 361; Bice v. Town of Walcott, 64 Minn. 459 , ), the present proceedings do not involve this issue.
  • State Ex Rel. Burnquist v. Marcks 36 N.W.2d 594 Minn. 1949
  • State Ex Rel. Burnquist v. Marcks 36 N.W.2d 594 Minn. 1949
    As stated in City of Rochester v. North Side Corp. 211 Minn. 276, 277 , 1 N. W. (2d) 361 , 362: “* * * Broadway, as laid out, constructed, and used on the ground, although 66 feet in width, is on a line deviating from the platted location ffiy a curve running first east and then back again toward the west,’ where it again enters the platted location some distance to the north of th
  • Village of Newport v. Taylor 30 N.W.2d 588 Minn. 1948
  • Village of Newport v. Taylor 30 N.W.2d 588 Minn. 1948
    As illustrative of the essentials necessary to raise an estoppel against a municipality, we have the recent decision of City of Rochester v. North Side Corp. 211 Minn. 276 , 1 N. W. (2d) 361 .