Home/Supreme Court of Minnesota/State Ex Rel. Township of Copley v. Village of Webb

State Ex Rel. Township of Copley v. Village of Webb

83 N.W.2d 788, 250 Minn. 22, 1957 Minn. LEXIS 610
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedJune 7, 1957
Docket36,516
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 83 N.W.2d 788 (State Ex Rel. Township of Copley v. Village of Webb) 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
State Ex Rel. Township of Copley v. Village of Webb, 83 N.W.2d 788, 250 Minn. 22, 1957 Minn. LEXIS 610 (Mich. 1957).

Opinion

Matson, Justice.

Original proceedings by writ of quo warranto challenging the legality of the incorporation of the village of Webb.

The sole issue is whether the territory included in such village is so conditioned as properly to be subjected to village government.

The referee appointed by this court, after an extended hearing and after a view of the locus in quo with counsel, concluded that the territory is not conditioned for village government and that the purported incorporation of the village is null and void. These conclusions were based on findings that: (1) There is no population nucleus on the platted portions of the territory; (2) the unplatted territory is not suburban in character and is not likely to become so in the near future; (3) there is not such a natural connection between the platted and unplatted areas involved as creates a community of interest among the residents as to desire and need for municipal services; and finally, (4) that the incorporation of the village will deprive the township of Copley of approximately 17 percent of its tax revenue, which deprivation will seriously curtail and handicap necessary township functions and government.

In passing on the evidence it is to be borne in mind that, although the burden of proof — without the benefit of any presumptions in favor of the propriety of the incorporation — rests upon the incor- *24 porators of a village, 1 their judgment is not to be lightly set aside unless the evidence clearly demonstrates that the area to be incorporated is not suburban in character and is not likely to become so in the near future, or that no community of interest exists between the inhabitants of the proposed village. 2 The findings of a referee appointed by this court have the effect of a special verdict 3 which is entitled to the same weight as a general verdict and is thus final upon appeal where the evidence is conflicting. 4

We turn to the evidence. The territory of the proposed village consists of 18.40 acres of platted land and 262.20 acres of unplatted land or a total of 280.60 acres. The platted area is divided into five subdivisions and contains slightly over half of the total population of 212 people. The remaining people are in the unplatted area which has a population density of 0.4 persons per acre.

The territory is bounded on the east by the village of Bagley. Five-sevenths of the land area is located north of U. S. Highway No. 2 and the remaining portion is located on the south side of the highway. Two of the subdivisions of the platted area are north of the highway, one facing east toward the village of Bagley from which it is separated only by a street of the latter village. The other three subdivisions of platted land front on the south side of the highway. None of the subdivisions is contiguous to another since all are separated by intervening un-platted land.

A map of the proposed village territory (relators’ exhibit 1) is reproduced herewith for reference. The unplatted area is well described by the referee in his memorandum as follows:

“* * * The north half of the Northwest quarter of Section 30 is with *25 out buildings or roads and is composed of low or swamp land with light timber areas thereon and some grassland including some that has been clovered; this area also contains a bulldozed area and some unworked field. The Southwest quarter of the Northwest quarter of Section 30 consists of some brushland and some that has been used for farming. This area contains a set of farm buildings. The Southeast quarter of the Northwest quarter consists partly of timber land and some that has been planted in clover. The Southwest quarter of the Northeast quarter of Section 30 has several acres of pasture land and the rest is apparently lightly timbered. It is significant that, except for a strip of land along U. S. Highway No. 2, there are no roads or means of public access to any part of the Northwest quarter of Section 30, which has hereinbefore been discussed. There are no platted areas in this whole Northwest quarter section of 160 acres, which constitutes over one-half of the total area to be incorporated in the Village of Webb. The very few buildings that exist in the entire Northwest quarter section are located near U. S. Highway No. 2 and are shown on Relators’ Exhibit 1. It should be observed that some of such buildings are connected with a gas station and others with a concrete block plant, but neither of which businesses contribute anything to a necessary community of interest which is essential to a valid incorporation. The evidence discloses that these establishments to a very large extent serve areas away from and not a part of the Webb community. And now proceeding to the unplatted area to the south of U. S. Highway No. 2; the Northwest quarter of the Southwest quarter of Section 30 is predominantly hayland and timber and contains one fairly good budding and a few small buildings in the nature of shacks or sheds. The unplatted portion of the Northeast quarter of the Southwest quarter is hayland and timbered, with no buddings in the south half thereof at ad. This area also contains some gravel pits.”

The vdlage has a number of business establishments, ad of which are located along the highway; they include a general store, a motel, a concrete-block company, a lumberyard, a gas station with a restaurant, which operates six months of the year, an auto-wrecking yard, and a trader parking area. The vdlage has no schools, churches, dbraries, post offices, drugstores, clothing stores, banks, or civic organizations.

The statute authorizing the formation of a vdlage is M. S. A.

*26

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

Related

State Ex Rel. Town of White Bear v. City of White Bear Lake
95 N.W.2d 294 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1959)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
83 N.W.2d 788, 250 Minn. 22, 1957 Minn. LEXIS 610, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-township-of-copley-v-village-of-webb-minn-1957.