Kennedy v. City of North Oaks

Eighth Circuit

Kennedy v. City of North Oaks

13 F. App'x 440

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedJanuary 17, 2001

DocketNo. 00-2459MN

StatusPublished

This text of 13 F. App'x 440 (Kennedy v. City of North Oaks) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Kennedy v. City of North Oaks, 13 F. App'x 440 (8th Cir. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The principal issue in this appeal, as presented by appellant, is the validity of Ordinance 59 of the City of North Oaks, Minnesota, under both state and federal law. The District Court² granted sum[441]*441mary judgment for the defendants without reaching the merits.

We affirm, substantially for the reasons given in the well-reasoned opinions of the District Court. In particular, the plaintiffs have not shown by sufficient evidence that they have ever suffered an injury in fact by reason of the challenged Ordinance. The summary-judgment record establishes that the City has never applied the ordinance, nor has it threatened to apply it to the plaintiffs. Moreover, the plaintiffs have never attempted to develop their property.

We hold that there is no genuine issue of material fact with respect to the justiciability of the plaintiffs’ claims. The judgment of the District Court is

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The principal issue in this appeal, as presented by appellant, is the validity of Ordinance 59 of the City of North Oaks, Minnesota, under both state and federal law. The District Court² granted sum[441]*441mary judgment for the defendants without reaching the merits.

We affirm, substantially for the reasons given in the well-reasoned opinions of the District Court. In particular, the plaintiffs have not shown by sufficient evidence that they have ever suffered an injury in fact by reason of the challenged Ordinance. The summary-judgment record establishes that the City has never applied the ordinance, nor has it threatened to apply it to the plaintiffs. Moreover, the plaintiffs have never attempted to develop their property.

We hold that there is no genuine issue of material fact with respect to the justiciability of the plaintiffs’ claims. The judgment of the District Court is

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

13 F. App'x 440, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kennedy-v-city-of-north-oaks-ca8-2001.