Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Chandler, 197 N.W. 847.

30 citing documents.

State Ex Rel. Halverson v. Young 154 N.W.2d 699 Minn. 1967
State Ex Rel. Halverson v. Young 154 N.W.2d 699 Minn. 1967
2 This statute requires that defendant probationer be given an opportunity to show that the asserted grounds for revocation do not exist and that he “be given a chance to tell the court his disagreement with these charges and to offer proof that they are unfounded.” 3 Regardless of what we may have said in prior decisions of this court (State v. Chandler, 158 Minn. 447 , ; State ex rel.
Beatty v. Winona Housing & Redevelopment Authority 151 N.W.2d 584 Minn. 1967
Co. 176 Minn. 470 , ; In re Estate of Bridgham, 158 Minn. 467 , ; Koochiching Co. v. Franson, 91 Minn. 404 , .
State Ex Rel. Ahern v. Young 141 N.W.2d 15 Minn. 1966
State Ex Rel. Ahern v. Young 141 N.W.2d 15 Minn. 1966
Newman v. Wall, 189 Minn. 265 , ; State v. Chandler, 158 Minn. 447 , .
State Ex Rel. Morris v. Tahash 115 N.W.2d 676 Minn. 1962
State Ex Rel. Morris v. Tahash 115 N.W.2d 676 Minn. 1962
§ 610.39; Jenks v. Municipal Court, supra; State v. Chandler, 158 Minn. 447 , .
State v. McCarthy 104 N.W.2d 673 Minn. 1960
State v. McCarthy 104 N.W.2d 673 Minn. 1960
See, State v. Chandler, 158 Minn. 447 , 197 N. *33 W. 847 .
State v. Pierce 100 N.W.2d 137 Minn. 1959
Co. 120 Minn. 224 , ; In re Estate of Bridgham, 158 Minn. 467 , ; In re Estate of Nelson, 180 Minn. 570 , ; In re Estate of Devenney, 192 Minn. 265 , .
Atwood v. Atwood 91 N.W.2d 728 Minn. 1958
Co. 120 Minn. 224, 226 , ; In re Estate of Bridgham, 158 Minn. 467, 469 , ; In re Estate of Devenney, 192 Minn. 265 , .
State Ex Rel. Naus v. Rigg 84 N.W.2d 698 Minn. 1957
State Ex Rel. Naus v. Rigg 84 N.W.2d 698 Minn. 1957
In State v. Chandler, 158 Minn. 447 , , that rule was applied where the facts in the case were similar to those in the instant case.
In Re American Finnish Workers Society 76 N.W.2d 708 Minn. 1956
Co. 176 Minn. 470 , ; In re Estate of Bridgham, 158 Minn. 467 , ; Koochiching Co. v. Franson, 91 Minn. 404 , .
State Ex Rel. Schwanke v. Utecht 47 N.W.2d 99 Minn. 1951
State Ex Rel. Schwanke v. Utecht 47 N.W.2d 99 Minn. 1951
6 State v. Chandler, 158 Minn. 447 , .
State v. Meyer 37 N.W.2d 3 Minn. 1949
State v. Meyer 37 N.W.2d 3 Minn. 1949
Jenks v. Municipal Court, 197 Minn. 141 , ; State v. Chandler, 158 Minn. 447 , ; Escoe v. Zerbst, 295 U. S. 490 , 55 S. Ct. 818 , 79 L. ed. 1566; Annotations: 54 A. L. R. 1471; 132 A. L. R. 1248.
State Ex Rel. Ging v. Board of Education 7 N.W.2d 544 Minn. 1942
Co. 12 Minn. 269 (388); In re Estate of Bridgham, 158 Minn. 467 , ; In re Trusteeship Under Will of Rosenfeldt, 184 Minn. 303 , .
Daw v. Daw 4 N.W.2d 313 Minn. 1942
Co. 120 Minn. 224, 226 , ; In re Estate of Bridgham, 158 Minn. 467, 469 , ; In re Estate of Devenney, 192 Minn. 265 , .
Holbert v. Wermerskirchen 297 N.W. 327 Minn. 1941
Holbert v. Wermerskirchen 297 N.W. 327 Minn. 1941
Marquette Trust Co. v. Doyle, 176 Minn. 529 , ; Central State Bank v. Hanson, 158 Minn. 269 , ; Kleinman v. Sperry, 158 Minn. 447 , ; 8 Dunnell, Minn. Dig.
Johnson v. City of Minneapolis 295 N.W. 406 Minn. 1940
So, also, in In re Estate of Bridgham, 158 Minn. 467 , , a case involving the adjudication of inheritance taxes, where the court had made findings and order for judgment, pursuant to which judgment was entered September 11, 1923, and appeal from the judgment was not taken until January 9, 1924, well within the six-months period but much beyond the 30 days limited by statu
Aetna Life Insurance v. Cairney 256 N.W. 104 Minn. 1934
Co. 120 Minn. 224, 226 , ; In re Estate of Bridgham, 158 Minn. 467, 469 , .
In Re Estate of Devenney 256 N.W. 104 Minn. 1934
153 ; In re Estate of Bridgham, 158 Minn. 467 , 469 , .
State v. Binder 251 N.W. 665 Minn. 1933
State v. Binder 251 N.W. 665 Minn. 1933
In State v. Chandler, 158 Minn. 447 , , the court held that it had jurisdiction over defendant’s person even though the defendant was improperly brought into the state, having Avrongfully been taken from the state of Iowa.
In Re Trusteeship Under Last Will of Rosenfeldt 238 N.W. 687 Minn. 1931
In In re Estate of Bridgham, 158 Minn. 467 , , findings of fact and conclusions of law and direction to enter judgment accordingly were made in an inheritance tax matter.
In Re Estate of Nelson 231 N.W. 218 Minn. 1930
Van Aernam v. Winslow, 37 Minn. 514 , ; In re Estate of Bridgham, 158 Minn. 467 , .
In Re Dissolution of Olivia Co-Operative Mercantile Co. 210 N.W. 628 Minn. 1926
If it be said that because of their finality they are judgments upon the matters involved, then it must be held notwithstanding that they are to be considered as orders for the purpose of appeal under the rule of Koochiching Co. v. Franson, 91 Minn. 404 , , and In re Estate of Bridgham, 158 Minn. 467 , .