Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Kiges v. City of St. Paul, 62 N.W.2d 363.

65 citing documents.

Ellis Olkon, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Paul, (stating if question of whether ordinance is an unreasonable or arbitrary exercise of police po wer is fairly debatable, ordinance must be upheld as valid).
Halla Nursery, Inc. v. City of Chanhassen 781 N.W.2d 880 Minn. 2010
Halla Nursery, Inc. v. City of Chanhassen 781 N.W.2d 880 Minn. 2010
Paul, 240 Minn. 522, 538 , -74 (1953) *886 (applying vested rights doctrine to conclude that receipt of a permit and excavation were insufficient to provide a vested right to build a retail cleaning establishment on property rezoned for residential).
Concept Properties, LLP v. City of Minnetrista 694 N.W.2d 804 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Concept Properties, LLP v. City of Minnetrista 694 N.W.2d 804 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Paul, 240 Minn. 522, 538
Interstate Power Co. v. Nobles County Board of Commissioners 617 N.W.2d 566 Minn. 2000
Interstate Power Co. v. Nobles County Board of Commissioners 617 N.W.2d 566 Minn. 2000
State v. Lee 584 N.W.2d 11 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
State v. Lee 584 N.W.2d 11 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Paul, 240 Minn. 522, 529-30
Wegner v. Milwaukee Mutual Insurance 479 N.W.2d 38 Minn. 1991
Wegner v. Milwaukee Mutual Insurance 479 N.W.2d 38 Minn. 1991
Paul, 240 Minn. 522, 530
Northpointe Plaza v. City of Rochester 457 N.W.2d 398 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Northpointe Plaza v. City of Rochester 457 N.W.2d 398 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Paul, 240 Minn. 522, 532 , -71 (1953).
State, City of Eden Prairie v. Liepke 403 N.W.2d 252 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State, City of Eden Prairie v. Liepke 403 N.W.2d 252 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
See Kiges v. City of Saint Paul, 240 Minn. 522, 538 , W.H.
Haugen v. Peterson 400 N.W.2d 723 Minn. 1987
Haugen v. Peterson 400 N.W.2d 723 Minn. 1987
Paul, 240 Minn. 522 , and Hawkinson v. County of Itasca, 304 Minn. 367 , for the position that a plaintiff must demonstrate substantial progress in development or construction before a vested right accrues and the plaintiff can block the government’s rezoning of the property involved.
Jasaka Co. v. City of St. Paul 309 N.W.2d 40 Minn. 1981
Jasaka Co. v. City of St. Paul 309 N.W.2d 40 Minn. 1981
Paul, 240 Minn. 522, 538
Ridgewood Development Co. v. State 294 N.W.2d 288 Minn. 1980
Ridgewood Development Co. v. State 294 N.W.2d 288 Minn. 1980
State v. Larson Transfer & Storage, Inc. 246 N.W.2d 176 Minn. 1976
State v. Larson Transfer & Storage, Inc. 246 N.W.2d 176 Minn. 1976
Paul, 240 Minn. 522, 530 , we stated that a municipal zoning ordinance will not be declared unconstitutional— “* * * unless it affirmatively appears that the restriction is clearly arbitrary and unreasonable and without any substantial relation to public health, safety, morals, prosperity, or general welfare.”
Beck v. City of St. Paul 231 N.W.2d 919 Minn. 1975
Beck v. City of St. Paul 231 N.W.2d 919 Minn. 1975
Paul, 240 Minn. 522 , we construed an ordinance containing a similar consent provision as meaning that the 100-foot measurement runs from the boundary of the entire area to be rezoned, and not from any individual lot within the area.
Naugle-Leck, Inc. v. Bursch 202 N.W.2d 664 Minn. 1972
Denney v. City of Duluth 202 N.W.2d 892 Minn. 1972
Naugle-Leck, Inc. v. Bursch 202 N.W.2d 664 Minn. 1972
Paul, 240 Minn. 522 , 62 N. W. (2d) 363 [1953].” Far from being manifestly contrary to the evidence, the findings of mutual mistake are supported overwhelmingly by the testimony of Dworak, a disinterested witness, and, in part, by defendant Harry Fleischer himself, whose testimony was at best equivocal.
Denney v. City of Duluth 202 N.W.2d 892 Minn. 1972
Paul, 240 Minn. 522, 530 , : “Zoning statutes have become common and zoning ordinances which are fair in their requirements are generally sustained as an exercise of the police power * * *.
McGuire v. Hennessy 193 N.W.2d 313 Minn. 1971
McGuire v. Hennessy 193 N.W.2d 313 Minn. 1971
Anderson v. City of Minneapolis 178 N.W.2d 215 Minn. 1970
Anderson v. City of Minneapolis 178 N.W.2d 215 Minn. 1970
Paul, 240 Minn. 522 , 62 N. W. (2d) 363 ; Lowry v. City of Mankato, 231 Minn. 108 , 42 N. W. (2d) 553 ; Roerig v. Houghton, 144 Minn. 231 , ; Lerch v. City of Duluth, 88 Minn. 295 , .
O'BRIEN v. City of Saint Paul 173 N.W.2d 462 Minn. 1969
O'BRIEN v. City of Saint Paul 173 N.W.2d 462 Minn. 1969
Paul, 240 Minn. 522, 533 , 62 N. W. (2d) 363, 371 , we discussed and construed an ordinance similar to § 462.357, subd.
Sanderson v. City of Willmar 162 N.W.2d 494 Minn. 1968
Sanderson v. City of Willmar 162 N.W.2d 494 Minn. 1968
Paul, 240 Minn. 522 , 62 N. W. (2d) 363 .
Naegele Outdoor Advertising Co. of Minnesota, Inc. v. Village of Minnetonka 162 N.W.2d 206 Minn. 1968
Naegele Outdoor Advertising Co. of Minnesota, Inc. v. Village of Minnetonka 162 N.W.2d 206 Minn. 1968
Paul, 240 Minn. 522, 530 , 62 N. W. (2d) 363, 369 , we declared that ordinances enacted pursuant to the police power in this state “cannot be successfully attacked on constitutional grounds unless there is affirmative proof that the restriction is clearly arbitrary, discriminatory, and unreasonable and without any substantial relation to
Olsen v. City of Hopkins 149 N.W.2d 394 Minn. 1967
Olsen v. City of Hopkins 149 N.W.2d 394 Minn. 1967
Paul, 240 Minn. 522 , 62 N. W. (2d) 363 ; Bohan v. Village of Riverside, 9 Ill.
Arcadia Development Corp. v. City of Bloomington 125 N.W.2d 846 Minn. 1964
Arcadia Development Corp. v. City of Bloomington 125 N.W.2d 846 Minn. 1964
Paul, 240 Minn. 522 , 62 N. W. (2d) 363 .
Golden v. City of St. Louis Park 122 N.W.2d 570 Minn. 1963
Golden v. City of St. Louis Park 122 N.W.2d 570 Minn. 1963
Paul, 240 Minn. 522 , 62 N. W. (2d) 363 ; Olsen v. City of Minneapolis, 263 Minn. 1 , 115 N. W. (2d) 734 ; Pearce v. Village of Edina, 263 Minn. 553 , 118 Ñ. W. (2d) 659.
Pearce v. Village of Edina 118 N.W.2d 659 Minn. 1962
Pearce v. Village of Edina 118 N.W.2d 659 Minn. 1962
Paul, 240 Minn. 522 , 62 N. W. (2d) 363 .
Olsen v. City of Minneapolis 115 N.W.2d 734 Minn. 1962
Olsen v. City of Minneapolis 115 N.W.2d 734 Minn. 1962
Paul, 240 Minn. 522, 539 , 62 N. W. (2d) 363, 374 , as follows: “While this court must search the record to ascertain whether any erroneous rules of law have been applied and act accordingly, it must on appeal consider the testimony in the light most favorable to the prevailing party.
State Ex Rel. Berndt v. Iten 106 N.W.2d 366 Minn. 1960