Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Elam, 84 N.W.2d 227.

28 citing documents.

A19-1878 Minn. 2021
(“[W]e think it is apparent from the express wording of the statute that the act was passed for the benefit of the state as well.”).
In Re: Johnson Farms Objection to Delinquency Property Taxes. Minn. Ct. App. 2021
The supreme court clarified that “ the only defenses available in a delinquent tax proceeding ([chapter] 279) are that the land is exempt from taxation , that the taxes have been paid, or perhaps other jurisdictional defects.” State v. Elam , (emphasis added).
Odunlade v. City of Minneapolis 823 N.W.2d 638 Minn. 2012
Odunlade v. City of Minneapolis 823 N.W.2d 638 Minn. 2012
Fichtner v. Schiller, 271 Minn. 263, 267 , (quoting State v. Elam, 250 Minn. 274, 281 , ); see also, e.g., Evanson v. Comm’r of Taxation, 280 Minn. 559, 561, (“It is elementary that a taxpayer’s remedies for relief on the basis that realty has been unfairly or unequally assessed are statutory....
Programmed Land, Inc. v. O'CONNOR 633 N.W.2d 517 Minn. 2001
Programmed Land, Inc. v. O'CONNOR 633 N.W.2d 517 Minn. 2001
In the cases relied upon by the counties, State v. Elam, 250 Minn. 274 , Commissioner of Taxation v. Crow Wing County, 275 Minn. 9 , Fichtner v. Schiller, 271 Minn. 263 , and Land O’Lakes, we held that chapter 278 provides the exclusive means to bring an action in court to challenge an assessment, one of the five listed
Heideman v. Metropolitan Airports Commission 555 N.W.2d 322 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Heideman v. Metropolitan Airports Commission 555 N.W.2d 322 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
State v. Elam, 250 Minn. 274, 281-82
State v. American Fundamentalist Church 530 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 1995
In Re Collection of Delinquent Real Prop. Taxes 530 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 1995
State v. American Fundamentalist Church 530 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 1995
See State v. Elam, 250 Minn. 274, 281-282
In Re Collection of Delinquent Real Prop. Taxes 530 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 1995
See State v. Elam, 250 Minn. 274, 281-282
State v. Coolidge 282 N.W.2d 511 Minn. 1979
State v. Coolidge 282 N.W.2d 511 Minn. 1979
State v. Elam, 250 Minn. 274, 281 , State v. City of Duluth, 238 Minn. 128
Fingerhut v. Commissioner of Revenue 278 N.W.2d 528 Minn. 1979
Fingerhut v. Commissioner of Revenue 278 N.W.2d 528 Minn. 1979
In State v. Elam, 250 Minn. 274 , the court held that new statutory provisions requiring that certain objections and defenses to real estate taxes be made prior to the time the taxes were due implicitly repealed other provisions allowing such objections and defenses during delinquent tax proceedings.
Faith Evangelical Free Church v. County of Hennepin 246 N.W.2d 439 Minn. 1976
Faith Evangelical Free Church v. County of Hennepin 246 N.W.2d 439 Minn. 1976
State v. Elam, 250 Minn. 274 , Evanson v. Commr.
Thunderbird Motel Corporation v. County of Hennepin 183 N.W.2d 569 Minn. 1971
Thunderbird Motel Corporation v. County of Hennepin 183 N.W.2d 569 Minn. 1971
278.03 should be strictly construed to accomplish its purpose in preventing delay in the collection of taxes, citing State v. Elam, 250 Minn. 274, 278 , 84 N. W. (2d) 227, 230 .
Evanson v. Commissioner of Taxation 159 N.W.2d 259 Minn. 1968
Evanson v. Commissioner of Taxation 159 N.W.2d 259 Minn. 1968
State v. Elam, 250 Minn. 274 , 84 N. W. (2d) 227 .
Minneapolis Federation of Teachers, Local 59 v. Obermeyer 147 N.W.2d 358 Minn. 1966
Minneapolis Federation of Teachers, Local 59 v. Obermeyer 147 N.W.2d 358 Minn. 1966
It is well established that “[wjhen a law purports to be a revision of all laws upon a particular subject, or sets up a general or exclusive system covering the entire subject matter of a former law and is intended as a substitute for such former law, such law shall be construed to repeal all former laws upon the same subject.” State v. Elam, 250 Minn. 274, 281 , 84 N. W. (2d) 227, 232 ; 17 Dunnell, Dig.
Commissioner of Taxation v. Crow Wing County 144 N.W.2d 717 Minn. 1966
Commissioner of Taxation v. Crow Wing County 144 N.W.2d 717 Minn. 1966
6 See, State v. Elam, 250 Minn. 274 , 84 N. W. (2d) 227 .
Fichtner v. Schiller 135 N.W.2d 877 Minn. 1965
Fichtner v. Schiller 135 N.W.2d 877 Minn. 1965
ermined by the district court of the county in which the tax is levied by serving copies of a petition for such determination upon the county auditor, county treasurer, and the county attorney and filing the same, with proof of such service, in the office of the clerk of the district court on or before the first day of June of the year in which such tax becomes payable.” We said in State v. Elam, 250 Minn. 274, 281 , 84 N. W. (2d) 227 , 231: “Viewing c. 278 in its entirety, in the light of its p