Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State ex rel. Young v. Robinson, 112 N.W. 269.

35 citing documents.

State Ex Rel. Hatch v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. 609 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
State Ex Rel. Hatch v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. 609 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Young v. Robinson, 101 Minn. 277, 284-85 , 112 N.W.
Howard v. City of St. Louis Park 466 N.W.2d 759 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Howard v. City of St. Louis Park 466 N.W.2d 759 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Young v. Robinson, 101 Minn. 277, 283 , 112 N.W.
State ex rel. Spannaus v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. 304 N.W.2d 872 Minn. 1981
State ex rel. Spannaus v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. 304 N.W.2d 872 Minn. 1981
Young v. Robinson, 101 Minn. 277, 288-289 , 112 N.W.
Dunn v. Schmid 60 N.W.2d 14 Minn. 1953
Dunn v. Schmid 60 N.W.2d 14 Minn. 1953
Young v. Robinson, 101 Minn. 277 , , 20 L.R.A.
State Ex Rel. Dann v. Hutchinson 288 N.W. 845 Minn. 1939
State Ex Rel. Dann v. Hutchinson 288 N.W. 845 Minn. 1939
Young v. Robinson, 101 Minn. 277 , , 20 L.R.A.(N.S.)
State Ex Rel. Peterson v. District Court 264 N.W. 227 Minn. 1935
State Ex Rel. Peterson v. District Court 264 N.W. 227 Minn. 1935
Young v. Robinson, 101 Minn. 277 , , 20 L.R.A.
State Ex Rel. Anderson v. Erickson 230 N.W. 637 Minn. 1930
State Ex Rel. Anderson v. Erickson 230 N.W. 637 Minn. 1930
Young v. Robinson, 101 Minn. 277 , , 20 L.R.A.(N.S.)
State Ex Rel. Schmidt v. Youngquist 227 N.W. 891 Minn. 1929
State Ex Rel. Schmidt v. Youngquist 227 N.W. 891 Minn. 1929
Young v. Robinson, 101 Minn. 277 , , 20 L.R.A.
Schulte v. Fitch 202 N.W. 719 Minn. 1925
Schulte v. Fitch 202 N.W. 719 Minn. 1925
State v. Robinson, 101 Minn. 277 , , 20 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1127; Associated Schools v. School Dist.
State ex rel. Hilton v. Essling 195 N.W. 539 Minn. 1923
State ex rel. Hilton v. Essling 195 N.W. 539 Minn. 1923
State v. Robinson, 101 Minn. 277 , , 20 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1127, does not go so far as to hold that the mayor of a city may be removed from office in a proceeding instituted by the state whenever he is charged with a wilful disregard of his official duties.
Markley v. City of St. Paul 172 N.W. 215 Minn. 1919
Markley v. City of St. Paul 172 N.W. 215 Minn. 1919
Louis County, 90 Minn. 457 , ; State v. District Court of Ramsey County, 87 Minn. 146 , *358 ; Grant v. Berrisford, 94 Minn. 45 , ; State v. Robinson, 101 Minn. 277 , , 30 L.R.A.(N.S.)
City of Mankato v. Olger 148 N.W. 471 Minn. 1914
City of Mankato v. Olger 148 N.W. 471 Minn. 1914
It is also well established that the provisions of the statutes regulating the license and sale of intoxicating liquors were intended to establish *523 .-a substantially uniform system of laws upon that subject, State v. Robinson, 101 Minn. 277, 287 , , 20 L.R.A.
State ex rel. Miller v. Carver 147 N.W. 660 Minn. 1914
State ex rel. Miller v. Carver 147 N.W. 660 Minn. 1914
State v. Peterson, 38 Minn. 143 , ; State v. Eobinson, 101 Minn. 277 , ,.
State ex rel. Peacock v. Village Council of Osakis 128 N.W. 295 Minn. 1910
State ex rel. Peacock v. Village Council of Osakis 128 N.W. 295 Minn. 1910
State v. Robinson, 101 Minn. 277 , , 20 L.R.A.(N.S.)
State ex rel. Young v. Standard Oil Co. 126 N.W. 527 Minn. 1910
State ex rel. Young v. Standard Oil Co. 126 N.W. 527 Minn. 1910
State v. Robinson, 101 Minn. 277 , , 20 L. R. A. (N. S.) 1127.
State v. Crombie 119 N.W. 658 Minn. 1909
State v. Crombie 119 N.W. 658 Minn. 1909
State v. Robinson, 101 Minn. 277 , .
State ex rel. Young v. Minnesota Club 119 N.W. 494 Minn. 1909
Evans v. City of Redwood Falls 115 N.W. 200 Minn. 1908
Evans v. City of Redwood Falls 115 N.W. 200 Minn. 1908
It is clear that the statutes of 1887, while enacted for the purpose of creating a general system for the regulation of the traffic in intoxicating liquors (State v. Robinson, 101 Minn. 277 , ), was not intended to deprive municipalities of their charter powers to legislate upon the same subject-matter, so long as the municipal legislation was not inconsistent with the provisions of the general law.