Peterson v. City of Minneapolis

216 N.W. 228, 172 Minn. 604, 1927 Minn. LEXIS 1342
Supreme Court of Minnesota·Decided November 10, 1927·No. No. 26,383.·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiff appeals from an order denying his motion for a temporary injunction restraining the defendant city from completing condemnation proceedings instituted pursuant to L. 1925, p. 676, c. 417, to acquire certain lands belonging to the plaintiff for the purpose of widening a city street.

The statute gives a right of appeal to the district court from the order of confirmation of the city council. We are unable to see that the plaintiff may not get appropriate relief upon appeal. If so an injunction should not he granted. Plaintiff’s brief states that an appeal has been taken.

Order affirmed.

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

Peterson v. City of Minneapolis, 216 N.W. 228, 172 Minn. 604, 1927 Minn. LEXIS 1342 (Mich. 1927).

216 N.W. 228 (Peterson v. City of Minneapolis) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Freding v. City of Minneapolis
224 N.W. 845 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1929)
Peterson v. City of Minneapolis
221 N.W. 14 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1928)