Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Commissioner of Taxation v. Bennett, 18 N.W.2d 238.

13 citing documents.

City of Baxter v. City of Brainerd 932 N.W.2d 477 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See In re Raynolds' Estate , 219 Minn. 449 , , 241 (1945) ("We are required to look beyond mere words and inquire into the operation of the statute.").
ILHC OF EAGAN, LLC v. County of Dakota 693 N.W.2d 412 Minn. 2005
Moreover, “statutory provisions exempting property from taxation are to be strictly construed.” In re Raynolds’ Estate, 219 Minn. 449, 453 , see also TCF Bank Sav.
American Tower, L.P. v. City of Grant 621 N.W.2d 37 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
In re Raynolds’ Estate, 219 Minn. 449, 455
State v. Lucas 578 N.W.2d 775 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Nevertheless, this court is not required to adopt “a literal construction * * * contrary to the general policy and object of the statute.” In re Raynolds’ Estate, 219 Minn. 449 , -241 (1945).
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.
Shanklin v. County of St. Louis 308 N.W.2d 716 Minn. 1981
§ 645.16 (1980); see, e. g., In re Estate of Raynolds, 219 Minn. 449, 453
Goodman v. State, Department of Public Safety 282 N.W.2d 559 Minn. 1979
In re Estate of Raynolds, 219 Minn. 449 , Knopp v. Gutterman, 258 Minn. 33 , Mankato Citizens Telephone Company v. Commissioner of Taxation, 275 Minn. 107
Ingebritson v. TJERNLUND MANUFACTURING COMPANY 183 N.W.2d 552 Minn. 1971
In re Estate of Raynolds, 219 Minn. 449 , 18 N. W. (2d) 238 ; Stoecker v. Moeglein, 269 Minn. 19 , 129 N. W. (2d) 793 .
Estate of Haugan v. Commissioner of Taxation 147 N.W.2d 387 Minn. 1966
See, In re Estate of Raynolds, 219 Minn. 449 , 18 N. W. (2d) 238 .
Mankato Citizens Telephone Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation 145 N.W.2d 313 Minn. 1966
In re Estate of Raynolds, 219 Minn. 449, 456 , 18 N. W. (2d) 238, 242 ; Holmes v. Borgen, 200 Minn. 97 , .
Knopp v. Gutterman 102 N.W.2d 689 Minn. 1960
In re Estate of Raynolds, 219 Minn. 449 , 18 N. W. (2d) 238 .
Sevcik v. Commissioner of Taxation 100 N.W.2d 678 Minn. 1959
Such a result amounts to an absurdity, not within the contemplation of the legislature.” And in In re Estate of Raynolds, 219 Minn. 449, 453 , 18 N. W. (2d) 238, 240 , the court said: “* * * jt js our duty to interpret the statute in the light of its obvious purpose.
State v. P. K. M. Electric Co-operative, Inc. 65 N.W.2d 871 Minn. 1954
It contends for the rule that a statute creating exemption from taxation must be strictly construed and that any doubt should be resolved in favor of the taxing authority, citing Northwestern Municipal Assn. v. United States (D. Minn.) 22 F. Supp. 18 , affirmed (8 Cir.) 99 F. (2d) 460; In re Estate of Raynolds, 219 Minn. 449 , 18 N. W. (2d) 238 ; C. Thomas Stores Sales System, Inc. v. Spaeth, 209 Minn. *412 504 , ; State v. Redwood Falls Bldg.