Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Minnesota Microwave, Inc. v. Public Service Commission, 190 N.W.2d 661.

28 citing documents.

In Re the Welfare of J.B. 782 N.W.2d 535 Minn. 2010
In Re the Welfare of J.B. 782 N.W.2d 535 Minn. 2010
Comm’n, 291 Minn. 241, 245
Medica Primary v. Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Health & Welfare Fund 505 N.W.2d 589 Minn. 1993
Medica Primary v. Central States, Southeast & Southwest Areas Health & Welfare Fund 505 N.W.2d 589 Minn. 1993
Comm’n, 291 Minn. 241, 245-46
Quast Transfer, Inc. v. Minnesota Transportation Regulation Board 428 N.W.2d 462 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Quast Transfer, Inc. v. Minnesota Transportation Regulation Board 428 N.W.2d 462 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Minnesota Microwave, Inc. v. Public Service Commission, 291 Minn. 241, 244
In Re De Laria Transport, Inc. 427 N.W.2d 745 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
In Re De Laria Transport, Inc. 427 N.W.2d 745 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Minnesota Public Utilities Commission 420 N.W.2d 646 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
In Re the Deregulation of the Installation & Maintenance of Inside Wiring 420 N.W.2d 650 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. v. Minnesota Public Utilities Commission 420 N.W.2d 646 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
In Minnesota Microwave, Inc. v. Public Service Commission, 291 Minn. 241 , the supreme court considered for the first time whether a private company providing unidirectional, closed-circuit, microwave facilities was subject to the jurisdiction of the Commission as a “telephone company” or a supplier of “telephone service.” The court stated: [Wjhether appellant is sup
In Re the Deregulation of the Installation & Maintenance of Inside Wiring 420 N.W.2d 650 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
See Minnesota Microwave, Inc. v. Public Service Commission, 291 Minn. 241, 245
In re the Miltona State Bank 414 N.W.2d 794 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
In re the Miltona State Bank 414 N.W.2d 794 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
eferential, where the issue involved is the interpretation of a statute and the statutory language “is not exceedingly technical in nature such that only specialized agencies may be thought able to understand it,” the Minnesota Supreme Court has found there is “no good reason for deferring to administrative expertise for its interpretation.” Minnesota Microwave, Inc. v. Public Service Commission, 291 Minn. 241, 245
Tuma v. Commissioner of Economic Security 386 N.W.2d 702 Minn. 1986
Tuma v. Commissioner of Economic Security 386 N.W.2d 702 Minn. 1986
While we will give deference to an agency’s interpretation of a statute in certain cases, Minnesota Microwave, Inc. v. Public Service Commission, 291 Minn. 241, 245 , we are not bound by its interpretation.
Klatte v. Elm Creek Golf Course, Inc. 372 N.W.2d 54 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Klatte v. Elm Creek Golf Course, Inc. 372 N.W.2d 54 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
See Minnesota Microwave, Inc. v. Public Service Commission, 291 Minn. 241, 245
Application of Northwestern Bell Tel. Co. 367 N.W.2d 655 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Application of Northwestern Bell Tel. Co. 367 N.W.2d 655 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
n reads section 237.23 literally to apply not only to telephone companies but also to any “corporation, person, partnership, or association * * These entities, however, are modified by the phrase “subject to the provisions of this chapter.” Chapter 237 is “designed to deal with the specialized problems of public-utility telephone companies.” Minnesota Microwave, Inc. v. Public Service Commission, 291 Minn. 241, 250
J.C. Penney Co. v. Commissioner of Economic Security 353 N.W.2d 243 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
J.C. Penney Co. v. Commissioner of Economic Security 353 N.W.2d 243 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
A court, however, is not bound by an agency’s construction of statutory language where the statute is phrased in,common, rather than exceedingly technical, terms, see Minnesota Microwave, Inc. v. Public Service Commission, 291 Minn. 241, 245-46 , or where interpretation of the statute is based on legal, rather than factual, considerations, No Power Line
Arvig Telephone Co. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. 270 N.W.2d 111 Minn. 1978
Arvig Telephone Co. v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. 270 N.W.2d 111 Minn. 1978
See, Minnesota Microwave, Inc. v. Public Service Comm’n, 291 Minn. 241
City of Minneapolis v. Richardson 239 N.W.2d 197 Minn. 1976
City of Minneapolis v. Richardson 239 N.W.2d 197 Minn. 1976
See also, Quinn Distributing Co. Inc. v. Quasi Transfer, Inc. 288 Minn. 442 , Minnesota Microwave, Inc. v. Public Service Commission, 291 Minn. 241 , Gibson v. Civil Service Board, 285 Minn. 123
Transport Leasing Corporation v. State 199 N.W.2d 817 Minn. 1972
Transport Leasing Corporation v. State 199 N.W.2d 817 Minn. 1972
291 Minn. 241, 245 , In re Answer of Minnesota Power & Light Co. 289 Minn. 64