Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State ex rel. Simpson v. City of Mankato, 136 N.W. 264.

31 citing documents.

Town of Bridgie v. County of Koochiching 35 N.W.2d 537 Minn. 1948
Town of Bridgie v. County of Koochiching 35 N.W.2d 537 Minn. 1948
Simpson v. City of Mankato, 117 Minn. 458, 463 , , 41 L.R.A.(N.S.)
George Benz Sons, Inc. v. Ericson 34 N.W.2d 725 Minn. 1948
George Benz Sons, Inc. v. Ericson 34 N.W.2d 725 Minn. 1948
Simpson v. City of Mankato, 117 Minn. 458 , 136 N.W.
Leighton v. Abell 31 N.W.2d 646 Minn. 1948
State Ex Rel. Best v. Gibbons 278 N.W. 578 Minn. 1938
State Ex Rel. Best v. Gibbons 278 N.W. 578 Minn. 1938
Simpson v. City of Mankato, 117 Minn. 458 , , 41 L.R.A.(N.S.)
State v. Brown 248 N.W. 822 Minn. 1933
State v. Brown 248 N.W. 822 Minn. 1933
Simpson v. City of Mankato, 117 Minn. 458 , 136 N.W.
State Ex Rel. Benson v. Peterson 230 N.W. 830 Minn. 1930
State Ex Rel. Benson v. Peterson 230 N.W. 830 Minn. 1930
Simpson v. City of Mankato, 117 Minn. 458 , 136 N.W.
In Re Improvement of Third Street, St. Paul 225 N.W. 86 Minn. 1929
In Re Improvement of Third Street, St. Paul 225 N.W. 86 Minn. 1929
Simpson v. City of Mankato, 117 Minn. 458 , , 41 L.R.A.(N.S.)
Williams v. Evans 165 N.W. 495 Minn. 1917
Williams v. Evans 165 N.W. 495 Minn. 1917
498 ; State v. City of Mankato, 117 Minn. 458, 463 , , 41 L.R.A.(N.S.)
State ex rel. Zien v. City of Duluth 159 N.W. 792 Minn. 1916
State ex rel. Zien v. City of Duluth 159 N.W. 792 Minn. 1916
This provision was under consideration in State v. City of Mankato, 117 Minn. 458 , , 41 L.R.A.
State ex rel. Smith v. City of International Falls 156 N.W. 249 Minn. 1916
State ex rel. Smith v. City of International Falls 156 N.W. 249 Minn. 1916
Paul, 87 Minn. 381 , -, it is said of such a charter that it “is, without doubt subject to any subsequent valid act of the legislature which may apply thereto.” In State v. City of Mankato, 117 Minn. 458 , , 41 L.R.A.
State ex rel. Smallwood v. Windom 155 N.W. 629 Minn. 1915
State ex rel. Smallwood v. Windom 155 N.W. 629 Minn. 1915
In the investigation which has brought us to this conclusion, we have had continuously in mind the presumption of constitutionality which attends legislative acts and that, as said by Justice Philip E. Brown in State v. City of Mankato, 117 Minn. 458 , , cited by counsel for respondent, “the voice of the legislature is the voice of the sovereign people, and that, subject only to such limitations as the people have seen fit to incorporate in their Constitution, the legislature is vested with the
Smith ex rel. Smith v. City of St. Paul 150 N.W. 389 Minn. 1914
Smith ex rel. Smith v. City of St. Paul 150 N.W. 389 Minn. 1914
saved to the legislature to “provide general laws relating to affairs of cities * * * which * * * shall be paramount while in force to the provisions relating to the same matter included in the local charter herein provided for.” Manifestly the purpose of article 4 was to give cities the maximum freedom of self-government consistent with the general welfare of the state (State v. City of Mankato, 117 Minn. 458 , , 41 L.R.A.[N.S.]
Farrell v. Hicken 147 N.W. 815 Minn. 1914
Farrell v. Hicken 147 N.W. 815 Minn. 1914
450; State v. City of Mankato, 117 Minn. 458 , , 41 L.R.A.(N.S.)
State ex rel. Meighen v. Weatherill 147 N.W. 105 Minn. 1914
State ex rel. Meighen v. Weatherill 147 N.W. 105 Minn. 1914
State v. City of Mankato, 117 Minn. 458 , , 41 L.R.A.(N.S.)
State v. Minnesota & Ontario Power Co. 141 N.W. 839 Minn. 1913
State v. Minnesota & Ontario Power Co. 141 N.W. 839 Minn. 1913
State v. City of Mankato, 117 Minn. 458 , , 41 L.R.A.(N.S.)
State ex rel. Kelly v. Wolfer 138 N.W. 315 Minn. 1912
State ex rel. Kelly v. Wolfer 138 N.W. 315 Minn. 1912
As we have had occasion recently to* say: “Constitutions are not made for existing conditions * * *" nor in the view that the state of society will not advance or improve, but for future emergencies and conditions, and their terms and provisions are constantly expanded and enlarged by construction to meet the advancing and improving affairs of men.” State v. City of Mankato, 117 Minn. 458, 465 , , quoting from the opinion of Mr. Justice Brown in Elwell v. Comstock, 99 Minn. 261 , , 7 L.R.A.(N.S.