Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Zylka v. City of Crystal, 167 N.W.2d 45.

105 citing documents.

Chandler v. Kroiss 190 N.W.2d 472 Minn. 1971
Louis Park, 284 Minn. 351 , 170 N. W. (2d) 218 , and, to the extent that Westling relies upon it, Zylka v. City of Crystal, 283 Minn. 192 , 167 N. W. (2d) 45 .
Westling v. City of St. Louis Park 170 N.W.2d 218 Minn. 1969
Westling v. City of St. Louis Park 170 N.W.2d 218 Minn. 1969
* * * “* * * [Plaintiffs] had the burden of proving by clear and convincing evidence that the relief they sought would not result in any substantial detriment to neighboring property improved in reliance on the validity of the ordinance.” The distinction between a variance and a special-use permit has recently been defined in Zylka v. City of Crystal, 283 Minn. 192, 195 , 167 N. W. (2d) 45, 49 , where we said: “* * * Unlike a variance provision which permits particular property to be used in a m
Village of Farmington v. Minnesota Municipal Commission 170 N.W.2d 197 Minn. 1969
Village of Farmington v. Minnesota Municipal Commission 170 N.W.2d 197 Minn. 1969
See, Zylka v. City of Crystal, 283 Minn. 192 , 167 N. W. (2d) 45 .