Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 429.036 (2026)

Appeal From Determination Of Legality Of Petition

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

Any person, being aggrieved by this determination, may appeal to the district court of the county in which the property is located by serving upon the clerk of the municipality, within 30 days after the adoption and publication of the resolution, a notice of appeal briefly stating the grounds of appeal and giving a bond in the penal sum of $250, in which the municipality shall be named as obligee, to be approved by the clerk of the municipality, conditioned that the appellant will duly prosecute the appeal, pay all costs and disbursements which may be adjudged against the appellant, and abide by the order of the court. The clerk shall furnish the appellant a certified copy of the petition, or any part thereof, on being paid by appellant of the proper charges therefor. The appeal shall be placed upon the calendar of the next general term commencing more than 30 days after the date of serving the notice and filing the bond and shall be tried as are other appeals in such cases. Unless reversed upon the appeal, the determination of the governing body as to the sufficiency of the petition shall be final and conclusive.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1962–2013 · leading case: Vill. of Edina v. Joseph, 119 N.W.2d 809 (Minn. 1962).
Vill. of Edina v. Joseph, 119 N.W.2d 809 (Minn. 1962). “If the statute or charter provides a remedy by appeal or otherwise, such remedy is generally exclusive and will preclude any resort to equity.”
In re Application of Skyline Materials, Ltd., 835 N.W.2d 472 (Minn. 2013). · cites it 2× “46 (2012) (calling for service on the other party and filing with court administrator); Minn.Stat. § 429.036 (2012) (calling for service upon the clerk of defendant municipality); Minn.”
Larson v. Freeborn Cnty., 126 N.W.2d 771 (Minn. 1964). “The appeal provisions under §§ 429.036 and 429.081 furnish adequate remedies at law.”
Nastrom v. City of Blaine, 498 N.W.2d 495 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 4× “Did the trial court err in determining that the Nastroms’ challenge to the suffi *499 ciency of the petition was timely under Minn.Stat. § 429.036 (1988)? II. Was Project 87-11 an unpetitioned project requiring a four-fifths vote of the council? A.”
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.