Snaza v. City of Saint Paul, Minn.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• ruling plaintiff did not have a protected property interest in her application for a conditional use permit, because plaintiff failed to meet certain zoning regulations
• ruling on summary judgment that plaintiff did not have a protected property interest in her application for a conditional use permit, because plaintiff failed to meet certain zoning regulations
• rejecting plaintiff's argument that the Williamson County doctrine was merely \prudential\ and insisting that it was \jurisdictional\
• affirming district court’s dismissal of a takings claim for lack of subject matter jurisdiction
• reject- ing plaintiff ’s argument that the Williamson County doctrine was merely “prudential” and insisting that it was “jurisdictional”
• “We have held that Williamson County is jurisdictional.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).