Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Mattson v. Flynn, 13 N.W.2d 11.

79 citing documents.

Court of Appeals Hudson, J. Dissenting as to Part I, Anderson, J., David Smits, as Trustee for the … Minn. 2022
This is because “[t]he public policy of a state is for the legislature to determine and not the courts.” 11
William Jepsen, as Trustee for the Heirs and Next of Kin of Eric Parker Dean, Minn. 2021
(deferring to Legislature’s balancing of competing policy interests because “legislators are the elected representatives of the people and .
State of Minnesota, Minn. 2020
( stating that questions of public policy are for the Legislature and not the courts).
Nelson v. State 896 N.W.2d 879 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Nelson v. State 896 N.W.2d 879 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
See Nordling v. Ford Motor Co., 231 Minn. 68, 76-77 , -82 (1950) (“It is a general rule that a liberal construction is usually accorded statutes which are regarded by courts as humanitarian or which are grounded on a humane public policy.”); Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354, 361 , (“Pension and retirement acts are remedial in nature and as such entitled to a liberal construction to insure the beneficial purposes intended.”).
In the Matter of a Petition for Clarification of an Appropriate Unit Independent School District No. 622, North … 880 N.W.2d 383 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In the Matter of a Petition for Clarification of an Appropriate Unit Independent School District No. 622, North … 880 N.W.2d 383 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Servs., (quoting Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354, 363, in parenthetical).
Dukowitz v. Hannon Security Services 841 N.W.2d 147 Minn. 2014
Dukowitz v. Hannon Security Services 841 N.W.2d 147 Minn. 2014
First, as we observed in Nelson , this court “has generally been reluctant to undertake the task of determining public policy since this role is usually better performed by the legislature.” d at 457 n. 5; see also Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354, 363 , (“The public policy of a state is for the legislature to determine and not the courts.”).
Thao v. Command Center, Inc. 824 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Thao v. Command Center, Inc. 824 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
The fact that “able lawyers, after careful study of the provisions of the statute, have taken opposite views as to its meaning supports the conclusion that the language itself does not explicitly convey the intention of the legislature and that construction is necessary.” Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354, 358
Emerson v. Board of Independent School District 199 809 N.W.2d 679 Minn. 2012
Emerson v. Board of Independent School District 199 809 N.W.2d 679 Minn. 2012
Cf. Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354, 358 , ("A member of the present attorney general's staff has written an opinion in conflict with those of his predecessors in office.
McDermott v. Minnesota Teachers Retirement Fund 609 N.W.2d 926 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
McDermott v. Minnesota Teachers Retirement Fund 609 N.W.2d 926 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
“Because the teachers’ retirement statutes are remedial in nature, they are entitled to liberal construction to insure the beneficial purposes intended.” Stang, d at 349 (citing Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354, 361 , ).
Associated Builders & Contractors v. Carlson 590 N.W.2d 130 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Associated Builders & Contractors v. Carlson 590 N.W.2d 130 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
See Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354, 357-58 , (fact that able lawyers, after careful study of statutory provisions, took opposite views as to its meaning, supported conclusion that language itself did not explicitly convey legislature’s intention and that construction necessary).
Stang v. Minnesota Teachers Retirement Ass'n Board of Trustees 566 N.W.2d 345 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Stang v. Minnesota Teachers Retirement Ass'n Board of Trustees 566 N.W.2d 345 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
In Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354, 359 , the supreme court clarified that teachers retirement statutes are for benefit of teachers who render “long and faithful service” and to support the public interest of “making the occupation of ‘teacher’ in this state more attractive to qualified person[s].” Because the teachers retireme
Axelson v. Minneapolis Teachers' Retirement Fund Ass'n 544 N.W.2d 297 Minn. 1996
Axelson v. Minneapolis Teachers' Retirement Fund Ass'n 544 N.W.2d 297 Minn. 1996
3 Axelson, citing to Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354, 361 , (“[pension and retirement acts are remedial in nature and as such [are] entitled to a liberal construction to insure the beneficial purposes intended”), urges us to construe the plan documents liberally to ensure the beneficial purposes intended by the pension plan.
Axelson v. Minneapolis Teachers' Retirement Fund Ass'n 532 N.W.2d 594 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Axelson v. Minneapolis Teachers' Retirement Fund Ass'n 532 N.W.2d 594 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354, 361
Heaslip v. Freeman 511 N.W.2d 21 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Heaslip v. Freeman 511 N.W.2d 21 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354, 359
Rosinski v. TEACHERS RET. ASS'N 495 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Rosinski v. TEACHERS RET. ASS'N 495 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354, 359
Mrozka v. Archdiocese of St. Paul & Mpls. 482 N.W.2d 806 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Mrozka v. Archdiocese of St. Paul & Mpls. 482 N.W.2d 806 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354, 363
In Re the Welfare of C.J. 481 N.W.2d 861 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
In Re the Welfare of C.J. 481 N.W.2d 861 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354, 363
Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance Co. v. Arens 478 N.W.2d 235 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Grinnell Mutual Reinsurance Co. v. Arens 478 N.W.2d 235 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354, 357-58
Travelers Insurance Co. v. Tufte 435 N.W.2d 824 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Travelers Insurance Co. v. Tufte 435 N.W.2d 824 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
See Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354
Illg v. Forum Insurance Co. 435 N.W.2d 803 Minn. 1989
Illg v. Forum Insurance Co. 435 N.W.2d 803 Minn. 1989
See, e.g., Kachman v. Blosberg, 251 Minn. 224, 229 , Kollodge v. F. & L. Appliances, Inc., 248 Minn. 357, 360 , Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354, 358
Geo. A. Hormel & Co. v. Asper 428 N.W.2d 47 Minn. 1988
Geo. A. Hormel & Co. v. Asper 428 N.W.2d 47 Minn. 1988
In re Estate of Raynolds, 219 Minn. 449 , Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354 , Geo.
Geo. A. Hormel & Co. v. Asper 415 N.W.2d 706 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Donaldson v. Mankato Policemen's Benefit Ass'n 278 N.W.2d 533 Minn. 1979
Donaldson v. Mankato Policemen's Benefit Ass'n 278 N.W.2d 533 Minn. 1979
Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354
Independent School District No. 621 v. Public Employment Relations Board 268 N.W.2d 410 Minn. 1978
Independent School District No. 621 v. Public Employment Relations Board 268 N.W.2d 410 Minn. 1978
Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354 , Mankato Citizens Tel.
Abex Corporation v. Commissioner of Taxation 207 N.W.2d 37 Minn. 1973
Denney v. City of Duluth 202 N.W.2d 892 Minn. 1972
Denney v. City of Duluth 202 N.W.2d 892 Minn. 1972
No. 12, 272 Minn. 343, 353 , Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354 , County of Hennepin v. County of Houston, 229 Minn. 418
Mankato Citizens Telephone Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation 145 N.W.2d 313 Minn. 1966
Mankato Citizens Telephone Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation 145 N.W.2d 313 Minn. 1966
Mattson v. Flynn, 216 Minn. 354 , 13 N. W. (2d) 11 .
Village of Blaine v. Independent School District No. 12 121 N.W.2d 183 Minn. 1963