State v. Schlitz

Supreme Court of Minnesota

State v. Schlitz

160 N.W.2d 135, 281 Minn. 566, 1968 Minn. LEXIS 1041

Supreme Court of Minnesota·Decided July 12, 1968·No. No. 41,198·Published

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

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.

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

Pincite

160 N.W.2d 135 (State v. Schlitz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related