State v. Schlitz

160 N.W.2d 135, 281 Minn. 566, 1968 Minn. LEXIS 1041
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedJuly 12, 1968
DocketNo. 41,198
StatusPublished

This text of 160 N.W.2d 135 (State v. Schlitz) 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 v. Schlitz, 160 N.W.2d 135, 281 Minn. 566, 1968 Minn. LEXIS 1041 (Mich. 1968).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

Complaints charging defendants with violating the Sunday closing ordinance of the city of Bloomington (Bloomington City Code, c. 186) were dismissed by order of the Hennepin County Municipal Court upon the ground that the ordinance was so vague and uncertain as to offend the constitutional requirement of due process. See, State v. Target Stores, Inc. 279 Minn. 447, 156 N. W. (2d) 908.

As we have recently held in State v. Thomas, 279 Minn. 326, 156 N. W. (2d) 745, defendants’ motion to dismiss the attempted appeal by the city must be granted, for an appeal of right is not authorized by Minn. St. 632.11. Nor, as urged by the city, is such an appeal authorized by Rule 103.03(f), Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure.

Appeal dismissed.

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

Related

State v. Thomas
156 N.W.2d 745 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1968)
State v. Target Stores, Inc.
156 N.W.2d 908 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1968)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
160 N.W.2d 135, 281 Minn. 566, 1968 Minn. LEXIS 1041, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-schlitz-minn-1968.