Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 217 N.W.2d 502.

59 citing documents.

Megan Guetzkow, as mother and natural guardian of E.I., a minor, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Luz Hernandez, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In the Matter of the Petition of Northern States Power Company, d/b/a Xcel Energy, for Approval of Its … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In the Matter of the Petition of Northern States Power Company, d/b/a Xcel Energy, for Approval of Its … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
See, e.g., Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170, 176- 77, In re Petitions of D & A Truck Line, Inc., d 1, 6 (Minn. App. 1994).
Bruce Township v. Kevin Schmitz, Nathan A. Baum Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Bruce Township v. Kevin Schmitz, Nathan A. Baum Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Sullivan v. Credit River Twp., 299 Minn. 170, 176-77
In re Application of Gourley Brothers, LLC for a Water Appropriation Permit. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re Application of Gourley Brothers, LLC for a Water Appropriation Permit. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Sullivan v. Credit River Twp., 299 Minn. 170, 176-77
Safety Signs, LLC v. Niles-Wiese Construction Co. 840 N.W.2d 34 Minn. 2013
Safety Signs, LLC v. Niles-Wiese Construction Co. 840 N.W.2d 34 Minn. 2013
See Sullivan v. Credit River Twp., 299 Minn. 170, 176-77
Minnwest Bank v. Arends 802 N.W.2d 412 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Minnwest Bank v. Arends 802 N.W.2d 412 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Technical defects in compliance which do not reflect bad faith, undermine the purpose of the procedures, or prejudice the rights of those intended to be protected by the procedures will not suffice to overturn governmental action, particularly where, as here, substantial commitments have been made.”); Sullivan v. Credit River Twp., 299 Minn. 170, 176-77 , (holding that statute that “does not declare the consequences of a failure to comply may be construed as a directory statute” and failure to c
Hans Hagen Homes, Inc. v. City of Minnetrista 728 N.W.2d 536 Minn. 2007
Hans Hagen Homes, Inc. v. City of Minnetrista 728 N.W.2d 536 Minn. 2007
260 Minn. 70, 76 , see also Sullivan v. Credit River Twp., 299 Minn. 170, 176-77 , (stating that when a statute fails to provide consequences for failure to comply it is directory rather than mandatory).
Kahn v. Griffin 701 N.W.2d 815 Minn. 2005
Kahn v. Griffin 701 N.W.2d 815 Minn. 2005
We have stated that “every statute is understood to contain by implication, if not by express terms, all provisions necessary to effectuate its object and purpose.” Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170, 174
Savre v. Independent School District No. 283 642 N.W.2d 467 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Savre v. Independent School District No. 283 642 N.W.2d 467 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
“[A] statute which does not declare the consequences of a failure to comply may be construed as a directory statute.” Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170, 176-77 , (citation omitted).
Demolition Landfill Services, LLC v. City of Duluth 609 N.W.2d 278 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Demolition Landfill Services, LLC v. City of Duluth 609 N.W.2d 278 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Manco, d at 296 ; see Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170, 176-77 , (recognizing statute that does not state consequences of failure to comply is directory).
Eason v. Independent School District No. 11 598 N.W.2d 414 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Eason v. Independent School District No. 11 598 N.W.2d 414 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170, 176-77 , d *418 502, 507 (1974) (statute that does not express consequences of failure to comply with its provisions is directory); Manco of Fairmont, (statute can contain both directory and mandatory provisions), review denied (Minn. Oct.
Manco of Fairmont, Inc. v. Town Board of Rock Dell Township 583 N.W.2d 293 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Manco of Fairmont, Inc. v. Town Board of Rock Dell Township 583 N.W.2d 293 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170, 176-77
Southern Minnesota Municipal Power Agency v. Boyne 578 N.W.2d 362 Minn. 1998
Rupp v. Mayasich 533 N.W.2d 893 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Rupp v. Mayasich 533 N.W.2d 893 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Even before the Open Meeting Law contained an express notification provision, the Minnesota Supreme Court read one into the statute under the theory that a “statute is understood to contain by implication, if not by its express terms, all provisions necessary to effectuate its ⅜ * * purpose.” Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170, 174 , *895
In re Proposed Locke Lake Project 528 N.W.2d 875 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
In re Proposed Locke Lake Project 528 N.W.2d 875 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
See Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170, 176-177
Petition of D & a Truck Line, Inc. 524 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Petition of D & a Truck Line, Inc. 524 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
See Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170, 177 , (refusing to invalidate actions that were the result of a closed meeting because the law was directory, rather than mandatory); Minn.Stat.
Carl Bolander & Sons Co. v. City of Minneapolis 488 N.W.2d 804 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Carl Bolander & Sons Co. v. City of Minneapolis 488 N.W.2d 804 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Where a statute or rule does not explicitly declare *810 the consequences of a failure to comply, “we construe the language as directory only.” E.g., In Re Application of Crown Coco, Inc., (construing rule); see also Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170, 176-77 , (construing statute).
Application of Crown CoCo, Inc. 458 N.W.2d 132 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Application of Crown CoCo, Inc. 458 N.W.2d 132 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
See Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170, 176
Matter of Eigenheer 453 N.W.2d 349 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Matter of Eigenheer 453 N.W.2d 349 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170, 177 , d *355 502, 507 (1974).
Matter of Stubbe 443 N.W.2d 855 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Matter of Stubbe 443 N.W.2d 855 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Cf. Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170, 176-77
Northwest Publications, Inc. v. City of Saint Paul 435 N.W.2d 64 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Northwest Publications, Inc. v. City of Saint Paul 435 N.W.2d 64 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
er influences,” Lindahl v. Independent School District No. 306, 270 Minn. 164, 167 , (2) “to assure the public’s right to be informed,” Channel 10, Inc. v. Independent School District No. 709, 298 Minn. 306, 313 , and (3) “to afford the public an opportunity to present its views” in matters of public concern, Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170, 175 , -07 (1974).
State, City of Eden Prairie v. Liepke 403 N.W.2d 252 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State, City of Eden Prairie v. Liepke 403 N.W.2d 252 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
The dissent cited Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170 , a decision that preceded Mesaba but nevertheless applied estoppel against a governmental unit.
Handle With Care, Inc. v. Department of Human Services 393 N.W.2d 421 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Handle With Care, Inc. v. Department of Human Services 393 N.W.2d 421 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
See Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170, 176-77
Itasca County Board of Commissioners v. Olson 372 N.W.2d 804 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Itasca County Board of Commissioners v. Olson 372 N.W.2d 804 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
ect improper influences,” Lindahl v. Independent School District No. 306, 270 Minn. 164, 167 , (2) “to assure the public’s right to be informed,” Channel 10, Inc. v. Independent School District No. 709, 298 Minn. 306, 313 , and (3) “to afford the public an opportunity to present its views to the board,” Sullivan v. Credit River Town *807 ship, 299 Minn. 170, 175
City of Chanhassen v. County of Carver 369 N.W.2d 297 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
City of Chanhassen v. County of Carver 369 N.W.2d 297 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Sullivan v. Credit River Township, 299 Minn. 170, 176-77
Merz v. Leitch 342 N.W.2d 141 Minn. 1984

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by