DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Thomas v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Duluth, 48 N.W.2d 175.

32 citing documents.

  • MINN. ENERGY & ECONOMIC DEV. AUTH. v. Printy 351 N.W.2d 319 Minn. 1984
  • MINN. ENERGY & ECONOMIC DEV. AUTH. v. Printy 351 N.W.2d 319 Minn. 1984
    Paul Metropolitan Airports Comm'n, 223 Minn. 175, 188-91 , -28 (1947)), a local housing and redevelopment authority ( Thomas v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Duluth, 234 Minn. 221, 247-50 , ), a seaway port authority ( Visina v. Freeman, 252 Minn. 177, 199-200 , -53 (1958)), the Commissioner of Highways ( Anderson v. Comm'r of Highways, 267 Minn. 308, 311-14 , -83 (1964) (determining whether an individual was a "habitual violator" of
  • Rio Vista Non-Profit Housing Corp. v. County of Ramsey 277 N.W.2d 187 Minn. 1979
  • Rio Vista Non-Profit Housing Corp. v. County of Ramsey 277 N.W.2d 187 Minn. 1979
    Housing and Redevelopment Authority v. Froney, 305 Minn. 450 , Housing and Redevelopment Authority v. Greenman, 255 Minn. 396 , Thomas v. Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Duluth, 234 Minn. 221
  • R. E. Short Co. v. City of Minneapolis 269 N.W.2d 331 Minn. 1978
  • R. E. Short Co. v. City of Minneapolis 269 N.W.2d 331 Minn. 1978
    Paul v. Greenman, 255 Minn. 396 , Visina v. Freeman, 252 Minn. 177 , Thomas v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Duluth, 234 Minn. 221 , Erickson v. King, 218 *337 Minn. 98, Behrens v. City of Minneapolis, 199 Minn. 363 , 271 N.W.
  • Wass v. Anderson 252 N.W.2d 131 Minn. 1977
  • Wass v. Anderson 252 N.W.2d 131 Minn. 1977
    See, e. g., Thomas v. *398 Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Duluth, 234 Minn. 221 , Johnson v. Harrison, 47 Minn. 575
  • Minnesota Housing Finance Agency v. Hatfield 210 N.W.2d 298 Minn. 1973
  • Minnesota Housing Finance Agency v. Hatfield 210 N.W.2d 298 Minn. 1973
    Plaintiff argues with some force that the public purpose question is controlled by Thomas v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Duluth, 234 Minn. 221
  • PORT AUTHORITY OF CITY OF SAINT PAUL v. Fisher 145 N.W.2d 560 Minn. 1966
  • PORT AUTHORITY OF CITY OF SAINT PAUL v. Fisher 145 N.W.2d 560 Minn. 1966
    13 See, also, Thomas v. Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Duluth, 234 Minn. 221 , 48 N. W. (2d) 175 ; Housing and Redevelopment Authority of St.
  • Kronschnabel v. City of Saint Paul 137 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 1965
  • Kronschnabel v. City of Saint Paul 137 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 1965
    Co. v. City of Minneapolis, 229 Minn. 502 , 40 N. W. (2d) 353 , appeal dismissed, 339 U. S. 907 , 70 S. Ct. 574 , 94 L. ed. 1335; State v. City of Hudson, 231 Minn. 127 , 42 N. W. (2d) 546 ; Thomas v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Duluth, 234 Minn. 221 , 48 N. W. (2d) 175 ; State v. Clarke Plumbing & Heating, Inc. 238 Minn. 192 , 56 N. W. (2d) 667 ; State ex rel.
  • Thill v. Modern Erecting Company 136 N.W.2d 677 Minn. 1965
  • Thill v. Modern Erecting Company 136 N.W.2d 677 Minn. 1965
    11 Thomas v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Duluth, 234 Minn. 221, 245 , 48 N. W. (2d) 175, 190 ; Johnson v. Harrison, 47 Minn. 575 , .
  • PORT AUTHORITY OF CITY OF ST. PAUL v. Fisher 132 N.W.2d 183 Minn. 1964
  • PORT AUTHORITY OF CITY OF ST. PAUL v. Fisher 132 N.W.2d 183 Minn. 1964
    We have reference to Erickson v. King, 218 Minn. 98 , 15 N. W. (2d) 201 , involving the provisions of a law creating the Metropolitan Airports Commission; Holen v. MAC, 250 Minn. 130 , 84 N. W. (2d) 282 ; Thomas v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Duluth, 234 Minn. 221 , 48 N. W. (2d) 175 , being the first challenge in this state to the housing authority *288 law raised in this court; and Visina v. Freeman, 252 Minn. 177 , 89 N. W. (2d) 635 , in which the laws creating and providing for
  • Grobe v. Oak Center Creamery Co. 113 N.W.2d 458 Minn. 1962
  • Grobe v. Oak Center Creamery Co. 113 N.W.2d 458 Minn. 1962
    4 Housing & Redevelopment Authority v. Minneapolis Metropolitan Co. 259 Minn. 1 , 104 N. W. (2d) 864 ; Housing & Redevelopment Authority v. Greenman, 255 Minn. 396 , 96 N. W. (2d) 673 ; Thomas v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority, 234 Minn. 221 , 48 N. W. (2d) 175 ; Asch v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority, 256 Minn. 146 , 97 N. W. (2d) *63 656; In re Condemnation by Dairyland Power Co-op.
  • Chun King Sales, Inc. v. County of St. Louis 98 N.W.2d 194 Minn. 1959
  • Chun King Sales, Inc. v. County of St. Louis 98 N.W.2d 194 Minn. 1959
    the proceeds of which were to be devoted to investigation of better methods for production, shipment, and merchandising of that product; Visina v. Freeman, 252 Minn. 177 , 89 N. W. (2d) 635 , relating to the constitutionality of certain acts providing for the financing of reclamation of land and construction of terminal port facilities; Thomas v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Duluth, 234 Minn. 221 , 48 N. W. (2d) 175 , involving the validity of legislation providing for low-cost housi
  • HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ST. PAUL v. Greenman 96 N.W.2d 673 Minn. 1959
  • HOUSING AND REDEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY OF ST. PAUL v. Greenman 96 N.W.2d 673 Minn. 1959
    In Visina v. Freeman, 252 Minn. 177, 184 , 89 N. W. (2d) 635, 643 , we said: “The mere fact that some private interest may derive an incidental benefit from the activity does not deprive the activity of its public nature if its primary purpose is public.” Of more immediate application to the question before us is Thomas v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Duluth, 234 Minn. 221 , 48 N. W. (2d) 175 , wherein it was contended that Minn. Const, art. 1, § 13, limits the state’s power of emine
  • In Re Condemnation by Dairyland Power Cooperative 82 N.W.2d 56 Minn. 1957
  • In Re Condemnation by Dairyland Power Cooperative 82 N.W.2d 56 Minn. 1957
    They distinguish the more recent case of Thomas v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Duluth, 234 Minn. 221 , 48 N. W. (2d) 175 , where we upheld the constitutionality of the use of eminent domain in a slum clearance and public housing development project, by arguing that the right to condemnation rested upon the exercise of police power in the interest of public health, safety, and general welfare.
  • State v. International Harvester Co. 63 N.W.2d 547 Minn. 1954
  • State v. International Harvester Co. 63 N.W.2d 547 Minn. 1954
    Equity Farms, Inc. v. Hubbard, 203 Minn. 111 , ; Thomas v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority, 234 Minn. 221 , 48 N. W. (2d) 175 .
  • Kaljuste v. Hennepin County Sanatorium Commission 61 N.W.2d 757 Minn. 1953
  • Kaljuste v. Hennepin County Sanatorium Commission 61 N.W.2d 757 Minn. 1953
    Equity Farms, Inc. v. Hubbard, 203 Minn. 111 , ; Thomas v. Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Duluth, 234 Minn. 221 , 48 N. W. (2d) 175 .
  • City of Duluth v. Northland Greyhound Lines 52 N.W.2d 774 Minn. 1952
  • City of Duluth v. Northland Greyhound Lines 52 N.W.2d 774 Minn. 1952
    C. Thomas Stores Sales System, Inc. v. Spaeth, 209 Minn. 504 , ; State v. Meyer, 228 Minn. 286 , 37 N. W. (2d) 3 ; Thomas v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority, 234 Minn. 221 , 48 N. W. (2d) 175 ; State ex rel.