MEDI and AMICUS Action
When an important case involves eminent domain or a land use matter is before the court, MEDI will often ask to weigh in by submitting written arguments on behalf of landowners. This activity is known as amicus or friend of the court. In this case for MEDI will generally argue the broad based implications of the case and how the court should decide that case.
In Minnesota, eminent domain and land use cases pit the landowners against the government and the government has historically had various pro-government organizations submit amicus briefs in support of their position. Not until MEDI began to weigh in with amicus briefs were landowners supported by an outside organization that was pro-property owner. When a landowner's attorney has a case that is going up to the Court of Appeals or the Minnesota Supreme Court they most often seek the input from MEDI. MEDI will assess the merits and impact of the case and
participate, when appropriate.
Once the decision is made to weigh in on a case, a team of MEDI attorneys is assembled to research the case and to prepare a memorandum to the court based on prior caselaw and many years of experience in the area of eminent domain and land use law.
The following is a listing of some of the cases where MEDI has played an amicus role in the courts of Minnesota:
MEDI Amicus Brief Cases
County of Hennepin v. Laechelt
A19-0473 (Minn. 2020)
State v. Elbert
942 N.W.2d 182 (Minn. 2020)
Vermillion State Bank v. State
895 N.W.2d 269 (Minn. App. 2017)
RK Midway, LLC v. Metropolitan Council
A15-0530 (Minn. App. 2017)
Great River Energy v. Swedzinski
860 N.W.2d 362 (Minn. 2015)
Northern States Power Co. v. Alecson
831 N.W.2d 303 (Minn. 2013)
In re Lecy ex rel. Chanhassen Chiropractic Center, P.A.
2005 WL 62614, Minn.App. March 15, 2005
Hebert v. City of Fifty Lakes
744 N.W.2d 226 (Minn. 2008)
State of Minnesota v. Oliver
Case No. A08-646
The County of Dakota v. George W. Cameron, IV
--N.W.2d--,2012 WL 987299, Minn.App. March 26, 2012
William and Virginia Konze v. City of Onamia
Case No. A11-2263
In Minnesota, eminent domain and land use cases pit the landowners against the government and the government has historically had various pro-government organizations submit amicus briefs in support of their position. Not until MEDI began to weigh in with amicus briefs were landowners supported by an outside organization that was pro-property owner. When a landowner's attorney has a case that is going up to the Court of Appeals or the Minnesota Supreme Court they most often seek the input from MEDI. MEDI will assess the merits and impact of the case and
participate, when appropriate.
Once the decision is made to weigh in on a case, a team of MEDI attorneys is assembled to research the case and to prepare a memorandum to the court based on prior caselaw and many years of experience in the area of eminent domain and land use law.
The following is a listing of some of the cases where MEDI has played an amicus role in the courts of Minnesota:
MEDI Amicus Brief Cases
County of Hennepin v. Laechelt
A19-0473 (Minn. 2020)
State v. Elbert
942 N.W.2d 182 (Minn. 2020)
Vermillion State Bank v. State
895 N.W.2d 269 (Minn. App. 2017)
RK Midway, LLC v. Metropolitan Council
A15-0530 (Minn. App. 2017)
Great River Energy v. Swedzinski
860 N.W.2d 362 (Minn. 2015)
Northern States Power Co. v. Alecson
831 N.W.2d 303 (Minn. 2013)
In re Lecy ex rel. Chanhassen Chiropractic Center, P.A.
2005 WL 62614, Minn.App. March 15, 2005
Hebert v. City of Fifty Lakes
744 N.W.2d 226 (Minn. 2008)
State of Minnesota v. Oliver
Case No. A08-646
The County of Dakota v. George W. Cameron, IV
--N.W.2d--,2012 WL 987299, Minn.App. March 26, 2012
William and Virginia Konze v. City of Onamia
Case No. A11-2263