Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite HOUSING & REDEVEL. AUTHOR. OF MINNEAPOLIS v. Mpls. Metropolitan Co., 104 N.W.2d 864.

65 citing documents.

The City of Minneapolis, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Co. , 259 Minn. 1, 15, ).
City of Apple Valley v. William C. Thompson (deceased), Below, Gene Rechtzigel, individually and as trustee of Evelyn … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
City of Apple Valley v. William C. Thompson (deceased), Below, Gene Rechtzigel, individually and as trustee of Evelyn … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
v. Minneapolis Metro Co., 259 Minn. 1, 15
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
Eagan Economic Development Authority v. U-Haul Co. of Minnesota 765 N.W.2d 403 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Eagan Economic Development Authority v. U-Haul Co. of Minnesota 765 N.W.2d 403 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
City of Granite Falls v. Soo Line Railroad 742 N.W.2d 690 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
City of Granite Falls v. Soo Line Railroad 742 N.W.2d 690 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Lundell v. COOPERATIVE POWER ASS'N 707 N.W.2d 376 Minn. 2006
Lundell v. COOPERATIVE POWER ASS'N 707 N.W.2d 376 Minn. 2006
Housing & Redevelopment Authority in & for Richfield v. Walser Auto Sales, Inc. 630 N.W.2d 662 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Housing & Redevelopment Authority in & for Richfield v. Walser Auto Sales, Inc. 630 N.W.2d 662 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Co., 259 Minn. 1, 15 , )), review denied (Minn. Oct.
Itasca County v. Carpenter 602 N.W.2d 887 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Itasca County v. Carpenter 602 N.W.2d 887 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Co., 259 Minn. 1, 15 , ).
Town of Fayal v. City of Eveleth 587 N.W.2d 524 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Town of Fayal v. City of Eveleth 587 N.W.2d 524 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
In Housing and Redevelopment Authority v. Minneapolis Metropolitan Co., 259 Minn. 1, 15 , the supreme court stated: Courts may interfere only when the [con-demnor’s] actions are * * * taken capriciously, irrationally, and without basis in law or under conditions which do not authorize or permit the exercise of the asserted power.
County of Stearns v. Voller 584 N.W.2d 800 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
County of Stearns v. Voller 584 N.W.2d 800 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Co., 259 Minn. 1, 15 , (footnote omitted).
Minneapolis Community Development Agency v. Opus Northwest, LLC 582 N.W.2d 596 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Matter of MCDA 582 N.W.2d 596 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Matter of MCDA 582 N.W.2d 596 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Co., 259 Minn. 1, 15 , *599 ).
Minneapolis Community Development Agency v. Opus Northwest, LLC 582 N.W.2d 596 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Co., 259 Minn. 1, 15 , *599 ).
County of Dakota (CP 46-06) v. Lakeville 559 N.W.2d 716 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
County of Dakota (CP 46-06) v. Lakeville 559 N.W.2d 716 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Co., 259 Minn. 1, 15 , ).
UNIV. OF MN v. Chicago and NW Transp. 552 N.W.2d 578 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Regents of the University of Minnesota v. Chicago & North Western Transportation Co. 552 N.W.2d 578 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
UNIV. OF MN v. Chicago and NW Transp. 552 N.W.2d 578 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Regents of the University of Minnesota v. Chicago & North Western Transportation Co. 552 N.W.2d 578 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
City of Rochester v. People's Cooperative Power Ass'n 483 N.W.2d 477 Minn. 1992
City of Rochester v. People's Cooperative Power Ass'n 483 N.W.2d 477 Minn. 1992
Housing & Redevelopment Authority v. Minneapolis Metropolitan Co., 259 Minn. 1
City of Duluth v. State 390 N.W.2d 757 Minn. 1986
City of Duluth v. State 390 N.W.2d 757 Minn. 1986
In Housing and Redevelopment Authority v. Minneapolis Metropolitan Co., 259 Minn. 1 , this court stated: Great weight must be given to the determination of the condemning authority, and the scope of review is narrowly limited.
City of New Ulm v. Schultz 356 N.W.2d 846 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
City of New Ulm v. Schultz 356 N.W.2d 846 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Housing and Redevelopment Authority v. Minneapolis Metropolitan Co., 259 Minn. 1, 15 , -874 (1960).
City of Pipestone Ex Rel. Spannaus v. Halbersma 294 N.W.2d 271 Minn. 1980
City of Pipestone Ex Rel. Spannaus v. Halbersma 294 N.W.2d 271 Minn. 1980
The standard of review of determinations of public use and necessity by condemning authorities was thoroughly discussed by this court in Housing and Redevelopment Authority v. Minneapolis Metropolitan Co., 259 Minn. 1
HRA IN AND FOR CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS v. Froney 234 N.W.2d 894 Minn. 1975
HRA IN AND FOR CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS v. Froney 234 N.W.2d 894 Minn. 1975
Metropolitan Co. 259 Minn. 1
HOUSING & REDEV. AUTH. OF CITY OF ST. PAUL v. Schapiro 210 N.W.2d 211 Minn. 1973
HOUSING & REDEV. AUTH. OF CITY OF ST. PAUL v. Schapiro 210 N.W.2d 211 Minn. 1973
E.g., Visina v. Freeman, 252 Minn. 177 , Asch v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority, 256 Minn. 146 , Housing & Redevelopment Authority v. Greenman, 255 Minn. 396 , Housing & Redevelopment Authority v. Minneapolis Metropolitan Co. 259 Minn. 1 , Port Authority of City of St.
PORT AUTHORITY OF CITY OF ST. PAUL v. Groppoli 202 N.W.2d 371 Minn. 1972
PORT AUTHORITY OF CITY OF ST. PAUL v. Groppoli 202 N.W.2d 371 Minn. 1972
E.g., Visina v. Freeman, 252 Minn. 177 , Asch v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority, 256 Minn. 146 , Housing & Redevelopment Authority v. Greenman, 255 Minn. 396 , Housing & Redevelopment Authority v. Minneapolis Metropolitan Co. 259 Minn. 1 , Housing & Redevelopment Authority v. Coleman’s Service, Inc. 281 Minn. 63
County of Hennepin v. Mikulay 194 N.W.2d 259 Minn. 1972
County of Hennepin v. Mikulay 194 N.W.2d 259 Minn. 1972
In Housing and Redevelopment Authority v. Minneapolis Metropolitan Co. 259 Minn. 1, 14 , we reviewed a question of this kind by certiorari.
State v. Christopher 170 N.W.2d 95 Minn. 1969
State v. Christopher 170 N.W.2d 95 Minn. 1969
State, by Hilton, v. Voll, 155 Minn. 72 , ; see, Housing and Redevelopment Authority v. Minneapolis Metropolitan Co. 259 Minn. 1 , 104 N. W. (2d) 864 .” We may assume that, in making his determination, the commissioner took into consideration a great many factors, including the utilization of Hiawatha Avenue, cost, neighborhood severance and design, safety factors, and integration of the subject portion of the trunk highway with other segments
Housing & Redevelopment Authority v. Coleman's Service, Inc. 160 N.W.2d 266 Minn. 1968
Housing & Redevelopment Authority v. Coleman's Service, Inc. 160 N.W.2d 266 Minn. 1968
We think our opinion in Housing and Redevelopment Authority v. Minneapolis Metropolitan Co. 259 Minn. 1 , 104 N. W. (2d) 864 , in which we expressed a general reluctance to interfere with the exercise of the eminent domain power and a particular reluctance to upset findings of fact by the condemning authority, controls our disposition of this question.
Beatty v. Winona Housing & Redevelopment Authority 151 N.W.2d 584 Minn. 1967