Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State ex rel. City of St. Paul v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co., 251 N.W. 275.

17 citing documents.

Soo Line Railroad v. Minnesota Department of Transportation 304 N.W.2d 301 Minn. 1981
Soo Line Railroad v. Minnesota Department of Transportation 304 N.W.2d 301 Minn. 1981
Marie Railway, 190 Minn. 162 , 251 N.W.
Minneapolis Gas Co. v. Zimmerman 91 N.W.2d 642 Minn. 1958
Minneapolis Eastern Railway Co. v. City of Minneapolis 77 N.W.2d 425 Minn. 1956
Co. 190 Minn. 162, 164 , ; 16 Dunnell, Dig.
Orme v. Atlas Gas and Oil Co. 13 N.W.2d 757 Minn. 1944
Co. 190 Minn. 162 , 251 *
Cocker v. Cocker 10 N.W.2d 734 Minn. 1943
P. & S. S. M. Ry Co. 190 Minn. 162, 165 , , in discussing a statute which in part at least superseded the common law: “* * * Our single duty of the moment is to ascertain legislative design and give it scope over the whole of its intended field.
Judd v. Landin 1 N.W.2d 861 Minn. 1942
Co. 190 Minn. 162, 164 , .
Scott v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America 290 N.W. 431 Minn. 1940
Co. 190 Minn. 162 , ; Wells-Dickey Trust Co. v. C. B. & Q. R. Co. 159 Minn. 417 , .
Northern Pacific Railway Co. v. Thornton Bros. Co. 288 N.W. 226 Minn. 1939
Co. 190 Minn. 162 , ), and Ave see no reason why it should not apply also in the field of contract law.
State v. Hofacre 288 N.W. 13 Minn. 1939
Co. 190 Minn. 162, 165 , .
Teders v. Rothermel 286 N.W. 353 Minn. 1939
Co. 190 Minn. 162, 165 , .
Fletcher v. Scott 277 N.W. 270 Minn. 1938
Co. 190 Minn. 162 , ), we hold that the homestead exemption survives as against the claims of large categories of the owner’s employes, for wages, salaries, and other similar compensation.
Licha v. Northern Pacific Railway Co. 276 N.W. 813 Minn. 1937
Licha v. Northern Pacific Railway Co. 276 N.W. 813 Minn. 1937
Co. 190 Minn. 162, 164 , , we indicated the scope of the statute by saying: “It (L. 1925, c. 336) much amplified existing statutes but did not explicitly amend any.” A brief résumé of the statute will demonstrate what is meant.
Olson v. Chicago Great Western Railroad 259 N.W. 70 Minn. 1935
Co. 190 Minn. 162 , , the same section was under consideration.
Anderson v. Hill 254 N.W. 585 Minn. 1934
Co. 190 Minn. 162 , (following Wells-Dickey Trust Co. v. C. B. & Q. R. Co. 159 Minn. 417 , ).
State Ex Rel. v. M. St. P. S. S. M. Ry. Co. 251 N.W. 275 Minn. 1933