Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State ex rel. Olsen v. Board of Control of State Institutions, 88 N.W. 533.

46 citing documents.

State Ex Rel. Sviggum v. Hanson 732 N.W.2d 312 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State Ex Rel. Sviggum v. Hanson 732 N.W.2d 312 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
of Control, 85 Minn. 165, 166 , 88 N.W.
Associated Builders & Contractors v. Ventura 610 N.W.2d 293 Minn. 2000
Associated Builders & Contractors v. Ventura 610 N.W.2d 293 Minn. 2000
Olsen v. Board of Control of State Insts., 85 Minn. 165, 172 , 88 N.W.
City of Duluth v. Sarette 283 N.W.2d 533 Minn. 1979
City of Duluth v. Sarette 283 N.W.2d 533 Minn. 1979
Olsen v. Board of Control, 85 Minn. 165 , 88 N.W.
Wass v. Anderson 252 N.W.2d 131 Minn. 1977
Wass v. Anderson 252 N.W.2d 131 Minn. 1977
Olsen v. Board of Control, 85 Minn. 165, 175
Leighton v. Abell 31 N.W.2d 646 Minn. 1948
Lyman v. Chase 226 N.W. 633 Minn. 1929
Town of Kinghurst v. International Lumber Co. 174 Minn. 305 Minn. 1928
Town of Kinghurst v. International Lumber Co. 219 N.W. 172 Minn. 1928
Town of Kinghurst v. International Lumber Co. 174 Minn. 305 Minn. 1928
Olsen v. Board of Control, 85 Minn. 165 , ; McReavy v. Holm, 166 Minn. 22 , .
Town of Kinghurst v. International Lumber Co. 219 N.W. 172 Minn. 1928
Olsen v. Board of Control, 85 Minn. 165 , 88 N.W.
Dohs v. Holm 189 N.W. 418 Minn. 1922
Dohs v. Holm 189 N.W. 418 Minn. 1922
450; State v. Board of Control, 85 Minn. 165 , .
Seamer v. Great Northern Railway Co. 172 N.W. 765 Minn. 1919
Seamer v. Great Northern Railway Co. 172 N.W. 765 Minn. 1919
634; State v. Board of Control, 85 Minn. 165 , , and cases cited; State v. Madson, 43 Minn. 438 , ; State v. Cassidy, 22 Minn. 312 , 21 Am.
State v. Droppo 147 N.W. 829 Minn. 1914
State v. Droppo 147 N.W. 829 Minn. 1914
634; State v. Board of Control, 85 Minn. 165 , .
State v. People's Ice Co. 144 N.W. 962 Minn. 1914
State v. People's Ice Co. 144 N.W. 962 Minn. 1914
382; State v. Board of Control, 85 Minn. 165 , ; Merchants Nat.
State v. Tower Lumber Co. 110 N.W. 254 Minn. 1907
State v. Tower Lumber Co. 110 N.W. 254 Minn. 1907
State v. Board of Control, 85 Minn. 165 , ; Ek v. St.
Elwell v. Comstock 109 N.W. 698 Minn. 1906
Elwell v. Comstock 109 N.W. 698 Minn. 1906
765; State v. Board of Control, 85 Minn. 165 , .
City of Duluth v. Abrahamson 104 N.W. 682 Minn. 1905
City of Duluth v. Abrahamson 104 N.W. 682 Minn. 1905
(See also general principles discussed in State v. Board of Control, 85 Minn. 165 , ; Gaare v. Board of Co. Commrs.
Merchants National Bank v. City of East Grand Forks 102 N.W. 703 Minn. 1905
Merchants National Bank v. City of East Grand Forks 102 N.W. 703 Minn. 1905
Paul Permanent Loan Co., 84 Minn. 245 , ; State v. Board of Control, 85 Minn. 165 , ; State v. Board of Co. Commrs.
Atwell v. Parker 101 N.W. 946 Minn. 1904
Atwell v. Parker 101 N.W. 946 Minn. 1904
State ex rel. Day v. Hanson 100 N.W. 1124 Minn. 1904
State ex rel. Skyllingstad v. Gunn 100 N.W. 97 Minn. 1904
State ex rel. Skyllingstad v. Gunn 100 N.W. 97 Minn. 1904
of Norman Co., 80 Minn. 58 , ; Winters v. City of Duluth, 82 Minn. 127 , ; State v. Board of Control, 85 Minn. 165 , .
State v. Boehm 100 N.W. 95 Minn. 1904
State v. Boehm 100 N.W. 95 Minn. 1904
of Ramsey Co. v. Heenan, 2 Minn. 281 (330); State v. Kinsella, 14 Minn. 395 (524); State v. Cassidy, 22 Minn. 312 ; Boyle v. Vanderhoof, 45 Minn. 31 , ; Johnson v. Harrison, 47 Minn. 575 , ; State v. Chapel, 63 Minn. 535 , ; State v. Board of Con *377 trol, 85 Minn. 165 , .
State v. Leland 98 N.W. 92 Minn. 1904
State v. Leland 98 N.W. 92 Minn. 1904
The numerous authorities which support these views are cited and illustrated in two recent decisions of this court in which this proposition is declared and enforced: Winters v. City of Duluth, 82 Minn. 127 , ; State v. Board of Control, 85 Minn. 165 , .
Gaare v. Board of County Commissioners 97 N.W. 422 Minn. 1903
Gaare v. Board of County Commissioners 97 N.W. 422 Minn. 1903
Paul Permanent Loan Co., 84 Minn. 245 , ; State v. Board of Control, 85 Minn. 165 , .
State v. Bishop Seabury Mission 95 N.W. 882 Minn. 1903
State v. Bishop Seabury Mission 95 N.W. 882 Minn. 1903
Constitution recognizes, and the intention was to make, a distinction between “colleges, universities, * * * seminaries of learning,” and “institutions of purely public charity.” While all colleges and seminaries conducted without a view to profit, and with funds contributed by benevolent persons, are, in a legal sense, and for certain purposes, charitable institutions (State v. Board of Control, 85 Minn. 165 , ), the Constitution is restrictive.
Joslyn v. Schwend 93 N.W. 705 Minn. 1903
Vogt v. Honstain 88 N.W. 443 Minn. 1902
Vogt v. Honstain 88 N.W. 443 Minn. 1902
The result of the former appeal herein (see 81 Minn. 174 , ) was that the cause was remanded for a new trial.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by