Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Mangold Midwest Co. v. Village of Richfield, 143 N.W.2d 813.

107 citing documents.

Fletcher Properties, Inc., et al., Appellants, vs. City of Minneapolis, Respondent, Poverty & Race Research Action ... Minn. 2025
Fletcher Properties, Inc., et al., Appellants, vs. City of Minneapolis, Respondent, Poverty & Race Research Action ... Minn. 2025
that clause will be construed liberally to allow effective self-protection by the municipality.”
Fletcher Properties, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis, Poverty & Race Research Action ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Fletcher Properties, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis, Poverty & Race Research Action ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Minn. Chamber, d at 449 (); see also Graco, -66 (Minn. 2020) (referencing the factors as the Mangold factors).
Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, et al., Minn. 2020
Graco, Inc., Minn. 2020
of Richfield, d 813, 816 (Minn. 1966) .
Calm Waters, LLC, a Limited Liability Company under the laws of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Mangold Midwest Co. v. Village of 8 Richfield
Bruce Clark, et al., Minn. 2019
of Richfield, ) ; see also City of Morris, d at 6 (stating that “state law may limit the power of a city to act in a particular area”).
Minn. Chamber Commerce v. City of Minneapolis 928 N.W.2d 757 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Minn. Chamber Commerce v. City of Minneapolis 928 N.W.2d 757 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
274 Minn. 347 , , 816-17 (1966) ; see Bicking , d at 313 (accord).
Graco, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis 925 N.W.2d 262 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Graco, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis 925 N.W.2d 262 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
274 Minn. 347 , , 818 (1966).
Jennissen v. City of Bloomington 913 N.W.2d 456 Minn. 2018
Jennissen v. City of Bloomington 913 N.W.2d 456 Minn. 2018
see also State v. Kuhlman , , 4 (Minn. App. 2006) (citing Mangold Midwest Co. v. Village of Richfield , 274 Minn. 347 , , 816 (1966) ), aff'd
Jennissen v. City of Bloomington 904 N.W.2d 234 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Jennissen v. City of Bloomington 904 N.W.2d 234 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Mangold Midwest Co. v. Village of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347, 350-52
Minnesota Chamber of Commerce, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
at 313 (quoting Mangold Midwest Co. v. Village of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347, 352, ).
Eureka Township, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Mangold Midwest Co. v. Village of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347, 352
Bicking v. City of Minneapolis 891 N.W.2d 304 Minn. 2017
Bicking v. City of Minneapolis 891 N.W.2d 304 Minn. 2017
of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347, 357 , ).
State of Minnesota v. James Nils Andersen Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. James Nils Andersen Minn. Ct. App. 2015
2, permits local authorities to enact some regulation, state law does not “occupy the field.” See Mangold Midwest Co. v. Village of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347, 356-60, -21 (1966) (applying preemption or occupation-of-the-field doctrine).
Ralph A. Fredlund v. Eureka Township Board of Supervisors Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Ralph A. Fredlund v. Eureka Township Board of Supervisors Minn. Ct. App. 2015
of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347, 352, −17 (1966) (addressing when state statute preempts local ordinance).
Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Duluth v. Brian Lee 852 N.W.2d 683 Minn. 2014
Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Duluth v. Brian Lee 852 N.W.2d 683 Minn. 2014
of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347, 352, d 15 813, 817 (1966); (holding that “no conflict exists” when an ordinance “covers specifically what the statute covers generally”).
Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Duluth v. Lee 832 N.W.2d 868 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Duluth v. Lee 832 N.W.2d 868 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
at 1217 ; Mangold Midwest Co. v. Village of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347, 350-60 , -21 (1966).
League of Women Voters Minnesota v. Ritchie 819 N.W.2d 636 Minn. 2012
Builders Ass'n v. City of St. Paul 819 N.W.2d 172 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Builders Ass'n v. City of St. Paul 819 N.W.2d 172 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347, 357
BRIDGEWATER TELEPHONE COMPANY, INC. v. City of Monticello 765 N.W.2d 905 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
BRIDGEWATER TELEPHONE COMPANY, INC. v. City of Monticello 765 N.W.2d 905 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
“ ‘[M]unicipalities have no inherent powers and possess only such powers as are expressly conferred by statute or implied as necessary in aid of those powers which have been expressly conferred.’” (quoting Mangold Midwest Co. v. Village of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347, 357 , ).
In Re the On-Sale Liquor License, Class B 763 N.W.2d 359 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
In Re the On-Sale Liquor License, Class B 763 N.W.2d 359 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347, 357 , ).
In Re the Denial of Certification of the Variance Granted to Haslund Ex Rel. City of St. Mary's … 759 N.W.2d 680 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
In Re the Denial of Certification of the Variance Granted to Haslund Ex Rel. City of St. Mary's … 759 N.W.2d 680 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
“It is elementary that an ordinance must not be repugnant to, but in harmony with, the laws enacted by the Legislature for the government of the state.” Mangold Midwest Co. v. Village of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347, 350 , (quotation omitted).
City of Morris v. Sax Investments, Inc. 749 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2008
City of Morris v. Sax Investments, Inc. 749 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2008
Generally, “municipalities have no inherent powers and possess only such powers as are expressly conferred by statute or implied as necessary in aid of those powers which have been expressly conferred.” Mangold Midwest Co. v. Village of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347, 357
State v. Kuhlman 729 N.W.2d 577 Minn. 2007
State v. Kuhlman 729 N.W.2d 577 Minn. 2007
Generally, “municipalities have no inherent powers and possess only such powers as are expressly conferred by statute or implied as necessary in aid of those powers which have been expressly conferred.” Mangold Midwest Co. v. Village of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347, 357
State v. Kuhlman 722 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
State v. Kuhlman 722 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
See Mangold Midwest Co. v. Village of Richfield, 274 *4 Minn. 347, 356
Haumant v. Griffin 699 N.W.2d 774 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Haumant v. Griffin 699 N.W.2d 774 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347, 356 , ).
In Re the Appeal of Rocheleau 686 N.W.2d 882 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
In Re the Appeal of Rocheleau 686 N.W.2d 882 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Mangold Midwest Co. v. Village of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347, 356
Nordmarken v. City of Richfield 641 N.W.2d 343 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Nordmarken v. City of Richfield 641 N.W.2d 343 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
of Richfield, 274 Minn. 347, 356
Buss v. Johnson 624 N.W.2d 781 Minn. Ct. App. 2001