Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Champ v. Brown, 266 N.W. 94.

30 citing documents.

Sylvester L. Zurn, individually and as beneficiary of the Sylvester L. Zurn Trust, dated December 30, 2002, et … Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(“The deed of an insane person not under guardianship is not void, but only voidable .
Joseph Rued v. Commissioner of Human Services Minn. 2024
Joseph Rued v. Commissioner of Human Services Minn. 2024
Mason’s Minn. Stat. ch. 73A § 8688-11 (Supp. 1938); (discussing “the clear distinction in law between the meaning of the mandatory word ‘shall’ as compared with the permissive word ‘may’ ”).
In Re Guardianship of Glenn 363 N.W.2d 348 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
In Re Guardianship of Glenn 363 N.W.2d 348 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Champ v. Brown, 197 Minn. 49, 58 , 266 N.W.
Long v. Campion 84 N.W.2d 686 Minn. 1957
Long v. Campion 84 N.W.2d 686 Minn. 1957
*212 When that is done, Champ v. Brown, 197 Minn. 49 , , is decisive of the issue here involved.
Sterling Electric Co. v. Kent 45 N.W.2d 709 Minn. 1951
Sterling Electric Co. v. Kent 45 N.W.2d 709 Minn. 1951
Champ v. Brown, 197 Minn. 49 , ; State v. Stroschein, 99 Minn. 248 , .
Wangensteen v. Northern Pacific Railway Co. 16 N.W.2d 50 Minn. 1944
Wangensteen v. Northern Pacific Railway Co. 16 N.W.2d 50 Minn. 1944
& Supp. § 8961; Champ v. Brown, 197 Minn. 49 , ; and Sexton v. Baehr, 212 Minn. 205, 207 , 3 N. W. (2d) 1, 2 , where we said: * * In a revision a change in phraseology or punctuation is presumed to be intended to simplify the language of the prior act, not to change its meaning.” Plaintiffs’ contention is that, because L. 1877, c. 119, the forerunne
Marsden v. Puck 13 N.W.2d 765 Minn. 1944
In Re Estate of Marsden 13 N.W.2d 765 Minn. 1944
Marsden v. Puck 13 N.W.2d 765 Minn. 1944
Champ v. Brown, 197 Minn. 49 , ; Schultz v. Oldenburg, 202 Minn. 237 , ; In re Hollis’ Estate, 234 Iowa —, 12 N. W. (2d) 576 ; 1 Page, Wills (Perm, ed.) § 153; Schouler, Wills (3 ed.) p. 85, § 81.
In Re Estate of Marsden 13 N.W.2d 765 Minn. 1944
Champ v. Brown, 197 Minn. 49 , 266 N.W.
Parrish v. Peoples 9 N.W.2d 225 Minn. 1943
Johnson v. Johnson 8 N.W.2d 620 Minn. 1943
Johnson v. Johnson 8 N.W.2d 620 Minn. 1943
Schultz v. Oldenburg, 202 Minn. 237 , *467 ; Champ v. Brown, 197 Minn. 49 , ; McAllister v. Rowland, 124 Minn. 27 , , Ann. Cas.
State Ex Rel. Laurisch v. Pohl 8 N.W.2d 227 Minn. 1943
State Ex Rel. Laurisch v. Pohl 8 N.W.2d 227 Minn. 1943
The meaning of a similar statutory change is clearly expressed in Champ v. Brown, 197 Minn. 49, 56 , , where the court said: “It is important that we bear in mind that in § 163 of the 1889 probate code the word ‘shall’ was used.
Rickel v. Peck 2 N.W.2d 140 Minn. 1942
In Re Guardianship of Overpeck 2 N.W.2d 140 Minn. 1942
In Re Guardianship of Overpeck 2 N.W.2d 140 Minn. 1942
Champ v. Brown, 197 Minn. 49 , 59 , 266 N.W.
Rickel v. Peck 2 N.W.2d 140 Minn. 1942
Champ v. Brown, 197 Minn. 49, 59 , ; First Nat.
Schultz v. Oldenburg 277 N.W. 918 Minn. 1938
Schultz v. Oldenburg 277 N.W. 918 Minn. 1938
1932, 1937), and cases under note 9; Annotation, 68 A. L. R. 1309; 108 A. L. R. 47; Champ v. Brown, 197 Minn. 49 , ; Johnson v. Hanson, 197 Minn. 496 , .
Jones v. First Minneapolis Trust Co. 277 N.W. 899 Minn. 1938
In Re Trusteeship Under Will of Jones 277 N.W. 899 Minn. 1938
In Re Trusteeship Under Will of Jones 277 N.W. 899 Minn. 1938
805 ; Champ v. Brown, 197 Minn. 49 , 266 N.W.
Jones v. First Minneapolis Trust Co. 277 N.W. 899 Minn. 1938
& Loan Co. 61 Minn. 35 , ; Hunter v. City of Tracy, 104 Minn. 378 , ; Carlson v. Township of Elmo, 141 Minn. 240 , ; Champ v. Brown, 197 Minn. 49 , .