DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Cook v. Trovatten, 274 N.W. 165.

108 citing documents.

  • Waste Recovery Cooperative v. County of Hennepin 517 N.W.2d 329 Minn. 1994
  • Waste Recovery Cooperative v. County of Hennepin 517 N.W.2d 329 Minn. 1994
    The court has described an official’s duty as ministerial “when it is absolute, certain and imperative, involving merely execution of a specific duty arising from fixed and designated facts.” Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Johnson v. County of Dakota 510 N.W.2d 237 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
  • Johnson v. County of Dakota 510 N.W.2d 237 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
    Peace officers charged with the duty to prevent crime and enforce the laws, “are not purely ‘ministerial officers,’ in that many of their duties are of an ‘executive character involving the exercise of discretion.’” (quoting Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Olson v. Ramsey County 509 N.W.2d 368 Minn. 1993
  • Olson v. Ramsey County 509 N.W.2d 368 Minn. 1993
    Duties are ministerial when they are certain and involve “ ‘merely the execution of a specific duty arising from fixed and designated facts.’ ” Elwood, d at 677 (quoting Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • McDonough v. City of Rosemount 503 N.W.2d 493 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
  • Soucek v. Banham 503 N.W.2d 153 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
  • Soucek v. Banham 503 N.W.2d 153 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
    An act is ministerial where it is “absolute, certain and imperative, involving merely the execution of a specific duty arising from fixed and designated facts.” Elwood, d at 677 (quoting Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • McDonough v. City of Rosemount 503 N.W.2d 493 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
    An official’s duty is ministerial “when it is absolute, certain and imperative, involving merely the execution of a specific duty arising from fixed and desig *498 nated facts.” Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Maras v. City of Brainerd 502 N.W.2d 69 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
  • Maras v. City of Brainerd 502 N.W.2d 69 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
    (quoting Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • S.L.D. v. Kranz 498 N.W.2d 47 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
  • S.L.D. v. Kranz 498 N.W.2d 47 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
    A duty is ministerial “when it is absolute, certain and imperative, involving merely the execution of a specific duty arising from fixed and designated facts.” Elwood, d at 677 (quoting Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Koelln v. Nexus Residential Treatment Facility 494 N.W.2d 914 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
  • Koelln v. Nexus Residential Treatment Facility 494 N.W.2d 914 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
    In contrast, a ministerial act is defined as “absolute, certain and imperative, involving merely the execution of a specific duty arising from fixed and designated facts.” Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Carradine v. State 494 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
  • Carradine v. State 494 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
    No. 314, Braham, -20 (Minn.1979) (quoting Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Rico v. State 472 N.W.2d 100 Minn. 1991
  • Rico v. State 472 N.W.2d 100 Minn. 1991
    The court has described an official’s duty as ministerial “when it is absolute, certain and imperative, involving merely execution of a specific duty arising from fixed and designated facts.” Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Johnson v. Morris 453 N.W.2d 31 Minn. 1990
  • Johnson v. Morris 453 N.W.2d 31 Minn. 1990
    Elwood, d at 678; see also Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Reuter v. City of New Hope 449 N.W.2d 745 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
  • Reuter v. City of New Hope 449 N.W.2d 745 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
    While this is generally a question which turns on the facts of each case, Minnesota courts have repeatedly suggested that “police charged with the duty to prevent crime and enforce laws are not purely ‘ministerial officers,’ and that many of their duties are ‘an executive character involving the exercise of discretion.’ ” Elwood at 678 (quoting Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Johnson v. Morris 445 N.W.2d 563 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
  • Johnson v. Morris 445 N.W.2d 563 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
    Elwood, d at 678 (quoting Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Snyder v. City of Minneapolis 422 N.W.2d 747 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • Snyder v. City of Minneapolis 422 N.W.2d 747 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
    Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59, 61 , (quoting Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Elwood v. County of Rice 423 N.W.2d 671 Minn. 1988
  • Elwood v. County of Rice 423 N.W.2d 671 Minn. 1988
    In Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Berg v. City of St. Paul 414 N.W.2d 204 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • Berg v. City of St. Paul 414 N.W.2d 204 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    1984); see Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Holmquist v. State 409 N.W.2d 243 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • Holmquist v. State 409 N.W.2d 243 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    (quoting Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , ).
  • Engle v. Hennepin County 412 N.W.2d 364 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • Engle v. Hennepin County 412 N.W.2d 364 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    Ministerial acts are “absolute, certain and imperative involving merely the execution of a specific duty arising from fixed designated facts.” Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Nusbaum v. County of Blue Earth 411 N.W.2d 917 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • Nusbaum v. County of Blue Earth 411 N.W.2d 917 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Stucci Ex Rel. Tierney v. City of Saint Paul 403 N.W.2d 850 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • Stucci Ex Rel. Tierney v. City of Saint Paul 403 N.W.2d 850 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    Governmental acts are either discretionary, requiring a balancing of competing factors at the planning, policy level, or ministerial (operational), meaning an “absolute, certain and imperative [act], involving merely the execution of a specific duty arising from fixed designated facts.” (quoting Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Bird v. State, Department of Public Safety 375 N.W.2d 36 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • Bird v. State, Department of Public Safety 375 N.W.2d 36 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    “Official duty is ministerial, when it is absolute, certain and imperative, involving merely execution of a specific duty arising from fixed and designated facts.” Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Robinson v. Hollatz 374 N.W.2d 300 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • Robinson v. Hollatz 374 N.W.2d 300 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    On the other hand, a ministerial act is one which is “absolute, certain, and imperative, involving merely execution of a specific duty arising from fixed and designated facts.” Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Lyons v. State Ex Rel. Humphrey Ex Rel. Pung 366 N.W.2d 621 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • Lyons v. State Ex Rel. Humphrey Ex Rel. Pung 366 N.W.2d 621 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    A ministerial act has been defined as “absolute, certain and imperative, involving merely the execution of a specific duty arising from fixed designated facts.” Ostendorf d at 837 , (citing Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Ostendorf v. Kenyon 347 N.W.2d 834 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • Ostendorf v. Kenyon 347 N.W.2d 834 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    A ministerial act has been defined as “absolute, certain and imperative, involving merely the execution of a specific duty arising from fixed designated facts.” Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
  • Larson Ex Rel. Larson v. Independent School District No. 314, Braham 289 N.W.2d 112 Minn. 1979
  • Larson Ex Rel. Larson v. Independent School District No. 314, Braham 289 N.W.2d 112 Minn. 1979
    Cook v. *120 Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.