Laserfiche WebLink
1986 -MUNCIPAL AMICUS PROGRAM <br /> (MAP) <br /> UPDATE <br /> In •March of - 1986 the .League ' s Municipal. .Amicus Program (MAP) was . <br /> established . The program offer-s .support to cities that are <br /> involved in litigation or other forms of controversy that may . <br /> have significant impact on the organization, operation, power, <br /> and duties of Minnesota'.s - cities . To date the program has <br /> . concentrated on cases that may -have a -substantial impact on <br /> municipal law through appellate court. decisions . The <br /> addition of a full-time attorney in- June , has enabled- the League <br /> to have a greater impact on the increasing volume of appellate <br /> court cases affecting Minnesota municipalities . <br /> Since June the program has filed four . amicus briefs and has three <br /> additional requests pending. The four cases in which briefs have <br /> been filed are: <br /> Lund v . . Hennepin County: a case challenging the <br /> constitutionality of the states property tax system. <br /> Disposition: Case is pending before the Minnesota Supreme Court . , <br /> Anderson v. City of Hopkins : a case challenging the right of <br /> a city and its employees to immediately appeal to the Court of <br /> Appeals , from a .trial courts wrongful denial of a summary <br /> judgement motion on the issue of qualified immunity. . <br /> Disposition: Case was decided in City ' s favor establishing an <br /> immediate right to appeal . The case allows cities to potentially <br /> avoid burdensome litigation in otherwise frivolous lawsuits. <br /> Wesala v . City of Virginia: a case challenging the Court of <br /> _ Appeals decision- holding-.that City waives its various statutory <br /> immunities by belonging to the League of Minnesota Cities <br /> Insurance Trust (LMCIT) . <br /> Dispositon: Case is pending before the Minnesota Supreme Court . ,. <br /> * Eden Prairie v . _Liepke•: :,a -,case addressing the. issue of .whether <br /> a city"can be prevented from enforcing its .zoning ordinance . <br /> because of statements -or -actions of city administrative personnel <br /> relied on by a land owner. <br /> Disposition: Case is pending before the. Minnesota Court of <br /> Appeal ., <br /> • <br />