Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 57 N.W.2d 254.

71 citing documents.

State v. Thonesavanh 904 N.W.2d 432 Minn. 2017
State v. Thonesavanh 904 N.W.2d 432 Minn. 2017
See Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428 , (interpreting the word “person” consistently across two “closely related” legislative acts because “[w]hen legislative acts involve a single subject or problem, there is an unusually strong reason for applying the rule of statutory construction that when statutes are in parí mateña they are
Osborne v. Twin Town Bowl, Inc. 749 N.W.2d 367 Minn. 2008
Osborne v. Twin Town Bowl, Inc. 749 N.W.2d 367 Minn. 2008
3 E.g., Kryzer, *373 d at 36 (“[T]he liquor illegally sold need not be the sole cause of intoxication, * * * it is enough if it be a ‘proximately contributing cause.’” (quoting Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428, 432 , -59 (1953))).
Carlson v. DEPT. OF EMPLOY. & ECON. DEV. 747 N.W.2d 367 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Carlson v. Department of Employment & Economic Development 747 N.W.2d 367 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Carlson v. DEPT. OF EMPLOY. & ECON. DEV. 747 N.W.2d 367 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428, 436 , (considering the use of "person" in other statutes, to determine whether it included municipal corporations).
Carlson v. Department of Employment & Economic Development 747 N.W.2d 367 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
When a term is not defined in the statute being interpreted, it is appropriate to “consider other statutes relating to the same subject matter as far as they shed light on the question.” Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428, 436 , (considering the use of “person” in other statutes, to determine whether it included municipal corporations).
Urban v. American Legion Department of Minnesota 723 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2006
Urban v. American Legion Department of Minnesota 723 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2006
Custody of A.V.A. v. Ratchaneewan 683 N.W.2d 325 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Custody of A.V.A. v. Ratchaneewan 683 N.W.2d 325 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
See Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428, 436 , (holding that court can consider other statutes on same subject to clarify statute’s meaning); Altenburg v. Bd.
Falgren v. STATE, BD. OF TEACHING 529 N.W.2d 382 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Falgren v. STATE, BD. OF TEACHING 529 N.W.2d 382 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
(noting that when construing statutes, courts must first discern the legislative intent and then "adopt the most logical and practical definition"); see also Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428, 436 , (holding that a reviewing court must consider contemporaneous statutes relating to the same subject matter in order to clarify a statute's legislative intent).
Breezy Point Holiday Harbor Lodge—Beachside Apartment Owners' Ass'n v. B.P. Partnership 531 N.W.2d 917 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Breezy Point Holiday Harbor Lodge—Beachside Apartment Owners' Ass'n v. B.P. Partnership 531 N.W.2d 917 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Cf. Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428, 435 , (under doctrine of in pari materia, different legislative acts involving single subject must be construed to avoid irreconcilable differences and conflicts).
Johnson v. Multiple Miscellaneous Items Numbered 1-424 523 N.W.2d 238 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Johnson v. Multiple Miscellaneous Items Numbered 1-424 523 N.W.2d 238 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428, 436
Kryzer v. Champlin American Legion No. 600 494 N.W.2d 35 Minn. 1992
Kryzer v. Champlin American Legion No. 600 494 N.W.2d 35 Minn. 1992
Thus, because an illegal sale of liquor to an obviously intoxicated patron invites an inference that the illegal sale, although not the sole cause of Mrs. Kry-zer’s intoxication, was a cooperating, concurring, or proximately contributing cause thereof, see Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428, 432 , -59 (1953), the trial court supplied the causal element missing from the complaint with respect to the relationship between illegal sale and intoxication.
Fette v. Peterson 404 N.W.2d 862 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Fette v. Peterson 404 N.W.2d 862 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
The trial court instructed, using the language of JIG II 449, that “a plaintiff may recover from one who makes an illegal sale of an alcoholic beverage when such illegal sale causes or contributes to a person’s intoxication.” Redning objected to the use of the words “or contributes.” In Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428 , the court stated: In order to establish liability for an illegal sale under the civil damage act, § 340.95, the liquor sold need not be the sole cause of intoxication b
Herrly v. Muzik 374 N.W.2d 275 Minn. 1985
Herrly v. Muzik 374 N.W.2d 275 Minn. 1985
Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428, 436
Hollerich v. City of Good Thunder 340 N.W.2d 665 Minn. 1983
Hollerich v. City of Good Thunder 340 N.W.2d 665 Minn. 1983
Civil damage acts “although penal in nature, are also remedial in character and, according to the *668 prevailing view, are to be liberally construed so as to suppress the mischief and advance the remedy.” Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428, 436 , (emphasis in the original).
Hannah v. Chmielewski, Inc. 323 N.W.2d 781 Minn. 1982
Hannah v. Chmielewski, Inc. 323 N.W.2d 781 Minn. 1982
It is in keeping with both objectives to allow this cause of action, especially in light of our recognition that “civil damage acts * * * are to be liberally construed so as to suppress the mischief and advance the remedy.” Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428, 436 , (emphasis in original) (footnote omitted).
Haskell's Inc. v. Sopsic 306 N.W.2d 555 Minn. 1981
Haskell's Inc. v. Sopsic 306 N.W.2d 555 Minn. 1981
They note that in Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428 , this court held that Minn.Stat.
Hannah v. Jensen 298 N.W.2d 52 Minn. 1980
Susla v. State 247 N.W.2d 907 Minn. 1976
Susla v. State 247 N.W.2d 907 Minn. 1976
We observed in Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428, 435 , 57 N. W. (2d) 254, 260 [1953], ‘an enterprise is proprietary when it is profit making in the sense that when conducted by private persons it is operated for profit.’ And in [Keever v. City of Mankato, ( 113 Minn. 55, 62 , [1910])] we said: ‘When the municipality enters the field of ordinary p
Ross v. Ross 200 N.W.2d 149 Minn. 1972
Ross v. Ross 200 N.W.2d 149 Minn. 1972
Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428, 433 , Dahl v. Northwestern Nat.
Hempstead v. Minneapolis Sheraton Corporation 166 N.W.2d 95 Minn. 1969
Hempstead v. Minneapolis Sheraton Corporation 166 N.W.2d 95 Minn. 1969
It stated that the true characterization of the statute was that set out in Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428, 436 , 57 N. W. (2d) 254, 261 , saying (291 F. [2d] 293): “It is to be borne in mind that civil damage acts, although penal in nature, are also remedial in character and, according to the prevailing view, are to be liberally construed so as to suppress the mischief and advance the remedy.” The main difficulty in apply
Skaja v. Andrews Hotel Company 161 N.W.2d 657 Minn. 1968
Skaja v. Andrews Hotel Company 161 N.W.2d 657 Minn. 1968
Ct. Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428 , 57 N. W. (2d) 254 .
Quigley v. Village of Hibbing 129 N.W.2d 765 Minn. 1964
Quigley v. Village of Hibbing 129 N.W.2d 765 Minn. 1964
See, also, Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428 , 57 N. W. (2d) 254 .
Bundy v. City of Fridley 122 N.W.2d 585 Minn. 1963
Bundy v. City of Fridley 122 N.W.2d 585 Minn. 1963
xicating liquors, caused the intoxication of such person, for all damages, sustained; and all damages recovered by a minor under this section shall be paid either to such minor or to his parent, guardian, or next friend, as the court directs; and all suits for damages under this section shall be by civil action in any court of this state having jurisdiction thereof.” 2 Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428 , 57 N. W. (2d) 254 ; Beck v. Groe, 245 Minn. 28 , 70 N. W. (2d) 886 , 52 A. L. R. (2d
Dahl v. NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL BANK MINNEAPOLIS 121 N.W.2d 321 Minn. 1963
Dahl v. NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL BANK MINNEAPOLIS 121 N.W.2d 321 Minn. 1963
Hartwig v. Loyal Order of Moose, supra; Adamson v. Dougherty, supra; Beck v. Groe, 245 Minn. 28 , 70 N. W. (2d) 886 , 52 A. L. R. (2d) 875; Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428 , 57 N. W. (2d) 254 ; Note, 46 Minn. L. Rev. 169 .
Murphy v. Hennen 119 N.W.2d 489 Minn. 1963
Murphy v. Hennen 119 N.W.2d 489 Minn. 1963
5 Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428 , 57 N. W. (2d) 254 .
Spanel v. Mounds View School District No. 621 118 N.W.2d 795 Minn. 1962
Spanel v. Mounds View School District No. 621 118 N.W.2d 795 Minn. 1962
12 Sometimes called the “Dram Shop Act.” 13 Hahn v. City of Ortonville, 238 Minn. 428, 434 , 57 N. W. (2d) 254, 259 .
Reierson v. City of Minneapolis 118 N.W.2d 223 Minn. 1962