1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.W.2d
  4. 625 N.W.2d
  5. 625 N.W.2d 834 (2001)
 

SOO LINE R. CO. v. CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS

No. CX-00-1449.

625 N.W.2d 834 (2001)

SOO LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, Relator, v. CITY OF MINNEAPOLIS, Respondent.

Court of Appeals of Minnesota.

May 8, 2001.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Carolyn V. Wolski, Diane P. Gerth, Leonard, Street and Deinard, Minneapolis, MN, (for relator).

Jay M. Heffern, Minneapolis City Attorney, Carol Lansing, Assistant City Attorney, Minneapolis, MN, (for respondent).

Considered and decided by HARTEN, Presiding Judge, CRIPPEN, Judge, and HANSON, Judge.

OPINION

CRIPPEN, Judge

Although the heritage-preservation designation of a northeast Minneapolis roundhouse does not affect relator Soo Line Railroad Company's present use of the building, relator contends that federal railway-operations law preempts the designation. Because there is no conflict that requires a preemption determination, we affirm the city's designation.

FACTS

Relator owns and operates a rail yard in northeast Minneapolis...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases