Court summons-2013 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

100. This cause of action is brought pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 586.01 et. seq for an order directing Defendant to administratively terminate the Restrictive Covenant, .; approve Plaintiffs' application and to declare the Lake Parcel a buildable lot. 101. The failure of Defendant to comply with its legal duties constitutes a public wrong specifically injurious to Plaintiffs, and as there is no plain, speedy, and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law, Plaintiffs are entitled to a writ of mandamus ordering Defendant to administratively terminate the Restrictive Covenant, approve Plaintiffs' application and to declare the Lake Parcel a buildable lot. COUNT XII DUE PROCESS 102. Plaintiffs restate and reallege paragraphs 1 through 101 of the Complaint. 103. Defendant, acting under the color of statute of law, required Plaintiffs' predecessor-in interest to enter into the Restrictive Covenant without any basis in law to do so. 104. Defendants' actions have deprived Plaintiffs, as successors-in-interest, of constitutionally protected due process rights and have violated the Fifth Amendment and Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. 105. As a direct and proximate result of Defendant's violation of Plaintiffs' due process rights, the Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution and the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution, Plaintiffs have been damaged in an amount as may be proven at trial, but reasonably believed to be in excess of$50,000.00. COUNT XIII NDICIAL REVIEW 106. Plaintiffs restate and reallege paragraphs 1 through 105 of the Complaint 107. Defendant, as a municipality within the State of Minnesota, is empowered to make decisions regarding municipal planning and zoning. 108. Defendant has failed to enact an ordinance, rule, or regulation that would allow Defendant to require its residents to enter into restrictive covenants in exchange 11