Patrick Doyle v. Municipal Commission of the State of Minnesota

Eighth Circuit

Patrick Doyle v. Municipal Commission of the State of Minnesota

468 F.2d 620

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit

DecidedNovember 14, 1972

Docket72-1320

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 468 F.2d 620 (Patrick Doyle v. Municipal Commission of the State of Minnesota) 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

Patrick Doyle v. Municipal Commission of the State of Minnesota, 468 F.2d 620 (8th Cir. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this case, the appellants, residents of Burnside Township, seek to enjoin the consolidation of their township with the nearby City of Red Wing, Minnesota. They claim that the procedures under which a state agency 1 effected consolidation of these two units of local government denied the residents of the township, who were unwillingly absorbed into the city, their constitutional rights to equal protection and due process. Ruling that the plaintiffs’ complaint raised no substantial constitutional claim, the district court (Chief Judge Devitt) refused appellants’ request to convene a three-judge court and dismissed the action for want of jurisdiction. Appellants brought this timely appeal.

We have reviewed the record on appeal, and it is apparent that appellants’ claim of infringement of their constitutional rights is without merit as demonstrated by Judge Devitt’s opinion published at 340 F.Supp. 841 (D.Minn. 1972). We affirm on the basis of that opinion.

1

. The Minnesota Municipal Commission, an agency of the State of Minnesota, direeted consolidation of Burnside Township and the City of Red Wing pursuant to Minn.Stat.Ann., Ch. 414 (Cum.Supp. 1972).

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

PER CURIAM.

In this case, the appellants, residents of Burnside Township, seek to enjoin the consolidation of their township with the nearby City of Red Wing, Minnesota. They claim that the procedures under which a state agency 1 effected consolidation of these two units of local government denied the residents of the township, who were unwillingly absorbed into the city, their constitutional rights to equal protection and due process. Ruling that the plaintiffs’ complaint raised no substantial constitutional claim, the district court (Chief Judge Devitt) refused appellants’ request to convene a three-judge court and dismissed the action for want of jurisdiction. Appellants brought this timely appeal.

We have reviewed the record on appeal, and it is apparent that appellants’ claim of infringement of their constitutional rights is without merit as demonstrated by Judge Devitt’s opinion published at 340 F.Supp. 841 (D.Minn. 1972). We affirm on the basis of that opinion.

1

. The Minnesota Municipal Commission, an agency of the State of Minnesota, direeted consolidation of Burnside Township and the City of Red Wing pursuant to Minn.Stat.Ann., Ch. 414 (Cum.Supp. 1972).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

468 F.2d 620, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/patrick-doyle-v-municipal-commission-of-the-state-of-minnesota-ca8-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack