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

Minn. Stat. § 117.08 (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[Repealed]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MS 1969 [Repealed, 1971 c 595 s 29]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 5 cases, 1963–2007 · leading case: Hous. & Redevelopment Auth. ex rel. City of Richfield v. Adelmann, 590 N.W.2d 327 (Minn. 1999).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Hous. & Redevelopment Auth. ex rel. City of Richfield v. Adelmann, 590 N.W.2d 327 (Minn. 1999). · cites it 4× “In Frisby , we held that there was no prejudice to a landowner when the commissioners failed to comply with the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 117.08 (1960) requiring separate awards for the value of land taken and for damages to other property.”
State v. Wren, Inc., 146 N.W.2d 547 (Minn. 1966). “Viewed in this way, the award is wholly consistent with the state’s sovereign right, exercised by the legislature through its agent, the commissioner of highways, to determine what is necessarily required for the widening and improving of Trunk Highway No.”
Hous. & Redevel. Auth. v. Adelmann, 590 N.W.2d 327 (Minn. 1999). · cites it 4× “In Frisby , we held that there was no prejudice to a landowner when the commissioners failed to comply with the provisions of Minn. Stat. § 117.08 (1960) requiring separate awards for the value of land taken and for damages to other property.”
State ex rel. Mondale v. Ohman, 125 N.W.2d 419 (Minn. 1963). “806, § 8), which authorizes appeals from “the final order or judgment affecting a substantial right made in a special proceeding * * They argue that under § 117.08 commissioners may attach reasonable conditions to the taking but that no such privilege obtains once the matter has…”
City of Granite Falls v. Soo Line R.R., 742 N.W.2d 690 (Minn. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “2d 769, 773 (1961) (holding that Minn.Stat. § 117.08 is not a “jurisdictional requirement” when the provision “do[es] not declare the consequences of a failure of compliance”).”
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.