Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Modern Box Makers, Inc., 13 N.W.2d 731.

25 citing documents.

Northern States Power Co. v. City of Oakdale 588 N.W.2d 534 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Northern States Power Co. v. City of Oakdale 588 N.W.2d 534 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
(quoting State v. Modern Box Makers, Inc., 217 Minn. 41, 47 , ).
Holt v. City of Sauk Rapids 559 N.W.2d 444 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Holt v. City of Sauk Rapids 559 N.W.2d 444 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
(quoting State v. Modern Box Makers, Inc., 217 Minn. 41, 47 , ).
Wheeler v. City of Wayzata 533 N.W.2d 405 Minn. 1995
Wheeler v. City of Wayzata 533 N.W.2d 405 Minn. 1995
State v. Modern Box Makers, Inc., 217 Minn. 41, 43
State v. Hyland 431 N.W.2d 868 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
State v. Hyland 431 N.W.2d 868 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
A strong showing of unreasonableness is required because if the “reasonableness of an ordinance is debatable, courts will not interfere with the legislative discretion.” State v. Modern Box Makers, Inc., 217 Minn. 41, 47
County of Freeborn v. Claussen 203 N.W.2d 323 Minn. 1972
County of Freeborn v. Claussen 203 N.W.2d 323 Minn. 1972
We said in State v. Modern Box Makers, Inc. 217 Minn. 41, 47 , : “Defendant finally contends that the ordinance is arbitrary and unreasonable in its application to the property here involved.
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
1 Connor v. Township of Chanhassen, 249 Minn. 205 , 81 N. W. (2d) 789 ; State v. Modern Box Makers, Inc. 217 Minn. 41 , 13 N. W. (2d) 731 .
Perron v. Village of New Brighton 145 N.W.2d 425 Minn. 1966
Perron v. Village of New Brighton 145 N.W.2d 425 Minn. 1966
Connor v. Township of Chanhassen, 249 Minn. 205 , 81 N. W. (2d) 789 ; State v. Modern Box Makers, Inc. 217 Minn. 41 , 13 N. W. (2d) 731 .
Filister v. City of Minneapolis 133 N.W.2d 500 Minn. 1964
Filister v. City of Minneapolis 133 N.W.2d 500 Minn. 1964
State v. Modern Box Makers, Inc. 217 Minn. 41, 49 , 13 N. W. (2d) 731, 735 .
Town of Burnsville v. City of Bloomington 128 N.W.2d 97 Minn. 1964
Town of Burnsville v. City of Bloomington 128 N.W.2d 97 Minn. 1964
7 State v. Modern Box Makers, Inc. 217 Minn. 41 , 13 N. W. (2d) 731 ; Lyons v. City of Minneapolis, 241 Minn. 439 , 63 N. W. (2d) 585 .
Pearce v. Village of Edina 118 N.W.2d 659 Minn. 1962
Pearce v. Village of Edina 118 N.W.2d 659 Minn. 1962
1 In State v. Modern Box Makers, Inc. 217 Minn. 41, 49 , 13 N. W. (2d) 731, 735 , where the court gave recognition to the rule that if the reasonableness of a zoning ordinance is debatable the courts will not interfere therewith, it was stated that such rule was applicable only “so long as the *572 regulation in question is not shown to be clearly unreasonable and arb
Connor v. Township of Chanhassen 81 N.W.2d 789 Minn. 1957
Connor v. Township of Chanhassen 81 N.W.2d 789 Minn. 1957
State v. Modern Box Makers, Inc. 217 Minn. 41 , 13 N. W. (2d) 731 .
State Ex Rel. Howard v. Village of Roseville 70 N.W.2d 404 Minn. 1955
State Ex Rel. Howard v. Village of Roseville 70 N.W.2d 404 Minn. 1955
Nectow v. City of Cambridge, 277 U. S. 183 , 48 S. Ct. 447 , 72 L. ed. 842; State v. Modern Box Makers, Inc. 217 Minn. 41 , 13 N. W. (2d) 731 .
Village of St. Louis Park v. Casey 16 N.W.2d 459 Minn. 1944

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by