From our private database of 37,500+ case briefs...
AVR, Inc. v. City of St. Louis Park
Minnesota Court of Appeals
585 N.W.2d 411 (1998)
A ready-mix concrete plant was constructed in the City of St. Louis Park (defendant) in 1954 and purchased by AVR (plaintiff) in 1974. In 1990, the city adopted a new comprehensive plan providing that the location of the AVR plant was to be rezoned for high-density residential use, and that ready-mix plants would be phased out. Thereafter, the city passed a 1992 rezoning ordinance requiring owners of property with nonconforming uses to meet with the zoning administrator for the determination of a reasonable amortization period. In determining the length of that period, the administrator was to consider a number of factors, including the nature, location, and character of the use, and the benefit to the public and burden on the owner of requiring termination of the use. After considering the applicable factors, the city amended its zoning ordinance to provide an amortization period of two years, after which AVR’s ready-mix use must cease. In its determination of the proper amortization period, the city also considered the remaining useful life of the plant based on conclusions drawn by an accounting firm and a real estate appraisal firm. The firms found that, over the life of the plant, AVR had earned a 560-percent return on its investment, and that the plant had been completely depreciated for income-tax purposes. On this basis, the city determined that the plant had passed its useful life. AVR brought suit, contending that the two-year amortization period was unreasonable. The city moved for summary judgment. The district court granted the motion, dismissing AVR’s complaint. AVR appealed.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Willis, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 631,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Berkeley, and Northwestern—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee
Here's why 631,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 37,500 briefs, keyed to 984 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.