I feel compelled in some way to report on the Court’s latest opinion release, especially since there’s a published land-use decision. That said, even I’m having a hard time finding much to take away from these cases. The neighbor-petitioner in Krummenacher v. Minnetonka challenges the city’s ability to allow expansion of nonconforming use by variance; the statute since 2004 has been pretty clear about a city’s ability to allow expansion through a hearing/permit process of its choosing. An unpublished opinion on a negligent-repair case from Waseca is a helpful run-down of the benefits of having a road-repair policy, but nothing out of the ordinary. And like most end runs, the legal outcome of “Gun SMOKE Monologues” fails to surprise.
Summertime blues, maybe?