DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Moe v. Alsop, 180 N.W.2d 255.

26 citing documents.

  • Monaghen v. Simon 888 N.W.2d 324 Minn. 2016
  • Monaghen v. Simon 888 N.W.2d 324 Minn. 2016
    Some of that delay may be excused because the challenger to a residency claim bears the burden of proof, see Moe v. Alsop, 288 Minn. 323, 330-31 , : Accordingly, before petitioner could file her petition, she needed to know more than' where Barrett claimed to be residing.
  • Weiler v. Ritchie 788 N.W.2d 879 Minn. 2010
  • Weiler v. Ritchie 788 N.W.2d 879 Minn. 2010
    Our precedent has termed the burden of proof that a petitioner bears in a ballot challenge to be a “heavy one.” Moe v. Alsop, 288 Minn. 323, 330-31
  • Studer v. Kiffmeyer 712 N.W.2d 552 Minn. 2006
  • Studer v. Kiffmeyer 712 N.W.2d 552 Minn. 2006
    We have explained that this kind of challenge to candidacy must be timely made: *557 “An applicant for the order must proceed promptly in view of the inherent limitations upon adequate judicial consideration.” Moe v. Alsop, 288 Minn. 323, 331
  • Lundquist v. Leonard 652 N.W.2d 33 Minn. 2002
  • Olson v. ZEUHLKE 652 N.W.2d 37 Minn. 2002
  • Piepho v. Bruns 652 N.W.2d 40 Minn. 2002
  • Lundquist v. Leonard 652 N.W.2d 33 Minn. 2002
    See Parsons v. Hickey, 294 Minn. 543, 544 , Moe v. Alsop, 288 Minn. 323, 325
  • Olson v. ZEUHLKE 652 N.W.2d 37 Minn. 2002
    See Parsons v. Hickey, 294 Minn. 543, 544 , Moe v. Alsop, 288 Minn. 323, 325
  • Piepho v. Bruns 652 N.W.2d 40 Minn. 2002
    See Parsons v. Hickey, 294 Minn. 543, 544 , Moe v. Alsop, 288 Minn. 323, 325
  • Schiff v. Griffin 639 N.W.2d 56 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
  • Schiff v. Griffin 639 N.W.2d 56 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
    § 204B.44 (citation omitted)); Moe v. Alsop, 288 Minn. 323, 325 , (“a person qualified to vote” can invoke the court’s jurisdiction to hear a petition to correct ballot error); State ex.
  • Derus v. Higgins 555 N.W.2d 515 Minn. 1996
  • Derus v. Higgins 555 N.W.2d 515 Minn. 1996
    We also reserve the issues of whether the established constitutional distinction between primary and general legislative elections may affect the reference of certain procedures to the judiciary by the legislature under Scheibel, d at 849, n. 15 (distinguishing Moe v. Alsop, 288 Minn. 323 , because it involved a candidate's placement on a primary ballot, not whether an elected state legislator should be removed).
  • Peterson v. Stafford 490 N.W.2d 418 Minn. 1992
  • Peterson v. Stafford 490 N.W.2d 418 Minn. 1992
    See also Marsh v. Holm, 238 Minn. 25, 28 , Moe v. Alsop, 288 Minn. 323, 331 , Parsons v. Hickey, 294 Minn. 537, 539
  • Scheibel v. Pavlak 282 N.W.2d 843 Minn. 1979
  • Distinguished Scheibel v. Pavlak 282 N.W.2d 843 Minn. 1979
    In Moe v. Alsop, 288 Minn. 323 , this court appointed a referee to determine the narrow question of length of residency.
  • Parsons v. Hickey 201 N.W.2d 739 Minn. 1972
  • Parsons v. Hickey 201 N.W.2d 739 Minn. 1972
    McGrath v. Erickson, 203 Minn. 390 , Moe v. Alsop, 288 Minn. 323
  • Parsons v. Hickey 201 N.W.2d 150 Minn. 1972
  • Parsons v. Hickey 201 N.W.2d 150 Minn. 1972
    This case is very similar to Moe v. Alsop, 288 Minn. 323
  • In Re Candidacy of Daly 200 N.W.2d 913 Minn. 1972
  • In Re Candidacy of Daly 200 N.W.2d 913 Minn. 1972
    Moe v. Alsop, 288 Minn. 323 , involved the eligibility of a candidate for the legislature.