Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 117. EMINENT DOMAIN
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 117.05 (2026)

[Repealed]

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

MS 1969 [Repealed, 1971 c 595 s 29]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1945–2008 · leading case: Iowa Elec. Light & Power Co. v. City of Fairmont, 67 N.W.2d 41 (Minn. 1954).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Iowa Elec. Light & Power Co. v. City of Fairmont, 67 N.W.2d 41 (Minn. 1954). · cites it 2× “Section 117.05 supports the gas company’s position in this respect.”
Brooks Inv. Co. v. City of Bloomington, 232 N.W.2d 911 (Minn. 1975). “1969, §§ 117.05 and 117.20, subd. 8(a). 2 On the other hand, it is the position of the city on this appeal that, notwithstanding any wrongful failure to serve Brooks with notice, it is not liable to him because Berglund as a matter of law was entitled to the award and thus *310…”
State Ex Rel. Grobe v. Oak Ctr. Creamery Co., 131 N.W.2d 621 (Minn. 1964). · cites it 2× “Upon payment by the petitioner of the fees and disbursements of the commissioners, which may be taxed- by the court in case of' failure to agree upon the amount there *507 of, they shall sign and deliver to the petitioner a notice that the report has been filed, which notice the…”
Hous. & Redevelopment Auth. Ex Rel. City of Fridley v. Main Street Fridley Props., LLC, 755 N.W.2d 789 (Minn. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 4× “Generally, the filing of a proper and timely appeal suspends the district court’s authority “to make any order necessarily affecting the order or judgment appealed from.”
City of Woodbury v. Woodbury Twp. Co., 254 N.W.2d 385 (Minn. 1977). “The statute places the burden on the petitioner to insure the commissioners file their award within the time limit set pursuant to § 117.05, subd. 1, or to get a time extension, at the risk of having the award vacated.”
In re Burnquist, 220 Minn. 129 (Minn. 1945). “Statutes have been enacted regulating the procedure in such proceedings.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.