My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
10-15-1984 Council Packet
Orono
>
City Council
>
1984
>
10-15-1984 Council Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/30/2025 9:58:20 AM
Creation date
10/30/2025 9:48:39 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
376
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Consolidated Appeals C3-53-699 and C2-93-1275 <br />STATE OF MINNESO'TA <br />IN SUdREM'c CUUdT <br />C. Rex Weish, <br />Plaintiff -despondent, <br />VS. APPELLANT'S MEMORA::JJ:: <br />OF LAO IN OPPOSITION TO <br />City of Orono, a Minnesota RESPONDENT'S PETIT:•O:: FOd <br />municipal corporation, RthcAdldw <br />betenoant-Appellant. <br />INTRODUCTION <br />In nis petition for renearing, reupondent C. Rex Welsh has <br />failed to establlan sufficient reason wny the court snould renear <br />nis arguments concerning I's claim for an award of attorney fees. <br />To the extent tnat Welsn seeKS to reargue nis entitlement to <br />attorney fees, appellant City of Orono incorporates by reference <br />the arguments set out at length in its appellate brief. In this <br />memorandum, the City will focus on the proper standards to be <br />applied to s petition for renearing. <br />ARGUMENT <br />I. Standard for Granting Petition for Rehearing <br />he in many endeavors in life, parties to an appeal in a <br />court of final 3urisdiction have out one opportunity to state <br />tneir case and tnen must abide by the rendered decision. While <br />CPC <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.