Rein Recreation, Inc. v. City of St. Paul

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Rein Recreation, Inc. v. City of St. Paul

298 N.W.2d 51, 1980 Minn. LEXIS 1562

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedAugust 22, 1980

DocketNo. 49624

StatusPublished

This text of 298 N.W.2d 51 (Rein Recreation, Inc. v. City of St. Paul) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rein Recreation, Inc. v. City of St. Paul, 298 N.W.2d 51, 1980 Minn. LEXIS 1562 (Mich. 1980).

Pincite

Opinion

OTIS, Justice.

This appeal from a declaratory judgment concerning the effect of state land use regulations on the development of a parcel of land was consolidated with an appeal from a condemnation award involving the same property, City of St. Paul v. Rein Recreation, Inc., Minn., 298 N.W.2d 46, released herewith. The district court determined that despite state land use regulations, appellants Rein Recreation, Inc. and Clayton G. Rein had a vested right to construct one high-rise apartment building on the property, but the right did not extend to a second high-rise included in the same plan. Additional facts are contained in the companion case.

The sole purpose of this declaratory judgment action was to fix appellants’ rights to develop their property, because the extent of those rights affected the market value of the real estate. However, because we have affirmed the condemnation award after reviewing all of the issues, we need not review this appeal since it no longer has any practical effect, In re Consolidation of Glendale with Savage, 288 Minn. 340, 180 N.W.2d 925 (1970). Accordingly it is hereby dismissed as moot.

Appeal dismissed as moot.

TODD, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. AMDAHL, J., not having been a member of the court at the time of the argument and submission, took no part in the consideration of this case.

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

OTIS, Justice.

This appeal from a declaratory judgment concerning the effect of state land use regulations on the development of a parcel of land was consolidated with an appeal from a condemnation award involving the same property, City of St. Paul v. Rein Recreation, Inc., Minn., 298 N.W.2d 46, released herewith. The district court determined that despite state land use regulations, appellants Rein Recreation, Inc. and Clayton G. Rein had a vested right to construct one high-rise apartment building on the property, but the right did not extend to a second high-rise included in the same plan. Additional facts are contained in the companion case.

The sole purpose of this declaratory judgment action was to fix appellants’ rights to develop their property, because the extent of those rights affected the market value of the real estate. However, because we have affirmed the condemnation award after reviewing all of the issues, we need not review this appeal since it no longer has any practical effect, In re Consolidation of Glendale with Savage, 288 Minn. 340, 180 N.W.2d 925 (1970). Accordingly it is hereby dismissed as moot.

Appeal dismissed as moot.

TODD, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case. AMDAHL, J., not having been a member of the court at the time of the argument and submission, took no part in the consideration of this case.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

298 N.W.2d 51, 1980 Minn. LEXIS 1562, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rein-recreation-inc-v-city-of-st-paul-minn-1980.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack