§
Subdivision 1.Fees and disbursements.
The commissioners shall, after notice to the petitioner, file their report with the court administrator of district court and the petitioner shall pay the commissioners their fees and disbursements. The court shall determine any dispute concerning the fees and disbursements.
§
Subd. 2.Notification.
Within ten days after the date of the filing of the report of commissioners, the petitioner shall notify the following listed persons, by mail, of the filing of the report of commissioners setting forth the date of filing of the report, the amount of the award, and all the terms and conditions thereof as the same pertain to the respondent or party listed:
(1) each respondent listed in the petition as having an interest in any parcel described in the report;
(2) each other party to the proceeding whose appearance has been noted by the court in its order approving the petition under section 117.075 as having an interest in any parcel described in the report; and
(3) each attorney appearing on behalf of each respondent or other party having an interest in any parcel described in the report.
Such notification shall be addressed to the last known post office address of each person notified. Notice of the filing of the report need not be given to parties initially served by publication under section 117.055. The petitioner shall file with the court administrator an affidavit of mailing of the notice, setting forth the names and addresses of all the persons so notified.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
7
cases, 1995–2007 · leading case:
Woodhall v. State, 738 N.W.2d 357 (Minn. 2007).
Woodhall v. State, 738 N.W.2d 357 (Minn. 2007).
· cites it 18× “award of damages embraced in the report, or from any omission to award damages, by: (1) filing with the court administrator a notice of such appeal, and (2) serving by mail a copy of such notice on all respondents and all other parties to the proceedings having an interest in…”
Hous. & Redevelopment Auth. ex rel. City of Richfield v. Adelmann, 590 N.W.2d 327 (Minn. 1999).
· cites it 58× “The central issues presented by this consolidated appeal are (1) whether compliance with the notice of filing requirements of Minn.Stat. § 117.115, subd. 2 (1998) is a jurisdictional prerequisite to an appeal from á condemnation commissioners’ award; and (2) whether a condemning…”
Hous. & Redevel. Auth. v. Adelmann, 590 N.W.2d 327 (Minn. 1999).
· cites it 58× “The central issues presented by this consolidated appeal are (1) whether compliance with the notice of filing requirements of Minn.Stat. § 117.115, subd. 2 (1998) is a jurisdictional prerequisite to an appeal from a condemnation commissioners' award; and (2) whether a condemning…”
Minneapolis Cmty. Dev. Agency v. Golden Spike, Inc., 536 N.W.2d 30 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 2× “Effective May 2, 1995, the statute now requires service of notice on all respondents and all other parties * * * to the proceedings having an interest in * * * any parcel described in the appeal who are shown in the petitioner’s affidavit of mailing, required by section 117.115,…”
Condemnation by Hous. & Redev. v. Suh, 553 N.W.2d 115 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 8× “The district court granted the motion and dismissed the HRA's appeal of the Commissioners' award.”
City of Granite Falls v. Soo Line R.R., 742 N.W.2d 690 (Minn. Ct. App. 2007).
· cites it 4× “” 2 Appellants argue that strict compliance with this provision is necessary for a district court to acquire subject-matter jurisdiction over a condemnation petition.”
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.