Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Sevcik v. Commissioner of Taxation, 100 N.W.2d 678.

34 citing documents.

Gen. Mills, Inc. v. Comm'r Revenue 931 N.W.2d 791 Minn. 2019
Gen. Mills, Inc. v. Comm'r Revenue 931 N.W.2d 791 Minn. 2019
See Busch v. Comm'r of Revenue , , 349 n.14 (Minn. 2006) (noting that "strict construction of tax deduction or exemption statutes should not invariably be applied when the reason for invoking the rule is not present"); Sevcik v. Comm'r of Taxation , 257 Minn. 92 , , 685-86 (1959) (concluding that the rule requiring strict construction of tax exemptions and deductions "must bow to" the rule that "the primary consideration in [ ] statutory construction is the intention of the legislature").
Allan v. R.D. Offutt Co. 869 N.W.2d 31 Minn. 2015
Alice Ann Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud 853 N.W.2d 713 Minn. 2014
Alice Ann Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud 853 N.W.2d 713 Minn. 2014
To determine legislative intent, we also may “consider the legislative history of the act under consideration, the subject matter as a whole, the purpose of the legislation, and objects intended to be secured thereby.” Sevcik v. Comm’r of Taxation, 257 Minn. 92, 103 , -87 (1959); see also Minn.Stat.
Busch v. Commissioner of Revenue 713 N.W.2d 337 Minn. 2006
Busch v. Commissioner of Revenue 713 N.W.2d 337 Minn. 2006
Sevcik v. Comm’r of Taxation, 257 Minn. 92, 101-02 , -86 (1959); see also Abex Corp. v. Comm’r of Taxation, 295 Minn. 445, 468-69 , (Kelly, J., dissenting).
Genin v. 1996 Mercury Marquis, Vin 2MEBP95F9CX644211 License No. MN 225 NSG 609 N.W.2d 266 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Genin v. 1996 Mercury Marquis, Vin 2MEBP95F9CX644211 License No. MN 225 NSG 609 N.W.2d 266 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Relying on Sevcik v. Commissioner of Taxation, 257 Minn. 92 , appellant argues that the Minnesota Supreme Court will avoid an interpreta *270 tion of a statute that will lead to an absurd result if the statutory language will reasonably bear another construction.
Haage v. Steies 555 N.W.2d 7 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Haage v. Steies 555 N.W.2d 7 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Laue v. Production Credit Ass’n, (citing Sevcik v. Commissioner of Taxation, 257 Minn. 92, 103 , ) (no deference to statements of legislative intent made subsequent to the passage of an act, even when the declarant was a legislator when the bill was in the process of passage); see also Investment Co. Inst.
Marriage of McKee-Johnson v. Johnson 444 N.W.2d 259 Minn. 1989
Marriage of McKee-Johnson v. Johnson 444 N.W.2d 259 Minn. 1989
§ 645.16(7) (1988); Sevcik v. Comm’r of Taxation, 257 Minn. 92, 103
Handle With Care, Inc. v. Department of Human Services 406 N.W.2d 518 Minn. 1987
Handle With Care, Inc. v. Department of Human Services 406 N.W.2d 518 Minn. 1987
Thus, we may “consider events leading up to [the legislation], the history of its passage, and any modifications made during its course.” Sevcik v. Commissioner of Taxation, 257 Minn. 92, 103
Laue v. Production Credit Ass'n of Blooming Prairie 390 N.W.2d 823 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Laue v. Production Credit Ass'n of Blooming Prairie 390 N.W.2d 823 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Contemporaneous history consists of “events leading up to [the act], the history of its passage, and any modifications made during its course.” Sevcik v. Commissioner of Taxation, 257 Minn. 92, 103
Pickands Mather & Co. v. Commissioner of Revenue 334 N.W.2d 155 Minn. 1983
Pickands Mather & Co. v. Commissioner of Revenue 334 N.W.2d 155 Minn. 1983
See Sevcik v. Commissioner of Taxation, 257 Minn. 92, 103 , (departmental construction of statute may be persuasive but does not preclude a different construction by the courts).
Town & Country Homes, Inc. v. Commissioner of Taxation 269 N.W.2d 7 Minn. 1978
Town & Country Homes, Inc. v. Commissioner of Taxation 269 N.W.2d 7 Minn. 1978
As stated in Sevcik v. Commissioner of Taxation, 257 Minn. 92, 103 , : “If there is ambiguity the court must, in construing the language, look to the whole statute for such aid as it may afford, and it is elementary that, in solving such a question, the whole statute must be considered.” Under the circumstances presented by this case, the decision of th
Abex Corporation v. Commissioner of Taxation 207 N.W.2d 37 Minn. 1973
American National Bank & Trust Co. v. Logan 176 N.W.2d 91 Minn. 1970
American National Bank & Trust Co. v. Logan 176 N.W.2d 91 Minn. 1970
of Taxation, 257 Minn. 92 , 100 N. W. (2d) 678 .
In Re Trust of Tufford 145 N.W.2d 59 Minn. 1966
Tufford v. Northwestern National Bank 145 N.W.2d 59 Minn. 1966
Tufford v. Northwestern National Bank 145 N.W.2d 59 Minn. 1966
of Taxation, 257 Minn. 92 , 100 N. W. (2d) 678 ; In re Estate of Bowlin, 189 Minn. 196 , ; State ex rel.
In Re Trust of Tufford 145 N.W.2d 59 Minn. 1966
[20] Sevcik v. Com'r of Taxation, 257 Minn. 92 , ; In re Estate of Bowlin, 189 Minn. 196 , 248 N.W.
Steele County Building & Loan Ass'n v. Commissioner of Taxation 116 N.W.2d 506 Minn. 1962
Steele County Building & Loan Ass'n v. Commissioner of Taxation 116 N.W.2d 506 Minn. 1962
of Taxation, 257 Minn. 92, 103 , 100 N. W. (2d) 678, 686 , as follows: “While courts have respect for and give weight to departmental construction of statutes, it is not controlling, and while administrative construction of statutes of doubtful meaning may be persuasive, it does not preclude a different construction by the courts.” In determin
State v. Pearson 110 N.W.2d 206 Minn. 1961
State v. Pearson 110 N.W.2d 206 Minn. 1961
of Taxation, 257 Minn. 92 , 100 N. W. (2d) 678 .
State v. Northwestern States Portland Cement Co. 103 N.W.2d 225 Minn. 1960
State v. Northwestern States Portland Cement Co. 103 N.W.2d 225 Minn. 1960
of Taxation, 257 Minn. 92 , 100 N. W. (2d) 678 .