Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite McKee v. Likins, 261 N.W.2d 566.

76 citing documents.

Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Tom Hunt, Steve Simon, ... Minn. 2024
Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Tom Hunt, Steve Simon, ... Minn. 2024
d 566, 570 (Minn. 1977).
Deborah Jane Clapp v. Rochelle Cox, in her official capacity as Interim Superintendent of Minneapolis ... Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Deborah Jane Clapp v. Rochelle Cox, in her official capacity as Interim Superintendent of Minneapolis ... Minn. Ct. App. 2023
See Schroeder v. Minn. Sec’y of State Steve Simon, (observing that the Minnesota Supreme Court’s which is frequently interpreted to suggest that taxpayer standing is broadly available, has been limited closely to its facts), petition for rev. dismissed (Minn. Nov.
In the Matter of the Petition of Scott Peter Zenanko Under Minn. Stat. 14.381. Minn. Ct. App. 2021
McKee v. Likins , 5 (Minn. 1977).
Dr. Jane Doe, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
I n support of their claimed taxpayer interest, appellants cite to the well - recognized taxpayer standing cases of McKee v. Likins , State v. Werder, 273 N.W.
Jennifer Schroeder, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
(stating that “the right of a taxpayer to maintain an action in the courts to restrain the unlawful use of public 4 According to MVA, it is “a state taxpayer” and “[i]ts membership includes individual registered voters and taxpayers.” 5 The district
Minnesota Sands, LLC, Minn. 2020
See McKee v. Likins , −70 n.1 (Minn. 1977) (stating that standing “is concerned with ‘who’ may bring a suit”).
A19-0355 Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“Taxpayers are legitimately concerned with the performance by public officers of their public duties.”
Criticized In the Matter of Minnesota Living Assistance, Inc., d/b/a Baywood Home Care. Minn. 2019
deemed beneficial to the concerns of efficient government and public participation.”
State of Minnesota, ex rel. Antwone Ford, Minn. 2019
See McKee v. Likins , –70 n.1 (Minn. 1977); see also State v. Murphy , (explaining that a r ipe dispute presents “a substantial and real controversy between the parties” based on a “direct and imminent injury”).
Minnesota Voters Alliance v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Minnesota Voters Alliance v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
[or] illegal action 5 on the part of public officials.” (quotation omitted).
Sayer v. Minnesota Department of Transportation 769 N.W.2d 305 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Citizens for Rule of Law v. Senate Committee on Rules & Administration 770 N.W.2d 169 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Citizens for Rule of Law v. Senate Committee on Rules & Administration 770 N.W.2d 169 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Sayer v. Minnesota Department of Transportation 769 N.W.2d 305 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Olson v. State 742 N.W.2d 681 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Olson v. State 742 N.W.2d 681 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
[or] illegal action on the part of public officials.” (quotation omitted); see also Arens v. Vill.
County of Morrison v. Wheeler 722 N.W.2d 329 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
County of Morrison v. Wheeler 722 N.W.2d 329 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Rather, the statute is directed towards the 'ripeness’ of a dispute, i.e., ‘when’ it may be brought; standing, on the other hand, is concerned with ‘who’ may bring a suit.” n. *337 1.
Rukavina v. Pawlenty 684 N.W.2d 525 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Rukavina v. Pawlenty 684 N.W.2d 525 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Weber v. Hvass 626 N.W.2d 426 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Weber v. Hvass 626 N.W.2d 426 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
The legislature included all agency activities within the general definition of “rule,” and then excluded specific activities from the definition “as it deemed beneficial to the concerns of efficient government and public participation.”
Conant v. Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi, L.L.P. 603 N.W.2d 143 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Conant v. Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi, L.L.P. 603 N.W.2d 143 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Women of the State v. Gomez 542 N.W.2d 17 Minn. 1995
Women of the State v. Gomez 542 N.W.2d 17 Minn. 1995
Matter of Intra-Lata Equal Access 532 N.W.2d 583 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Contel of Minnesota, Inc. v. Minnesota Public Utilities Commission 532 N.W.2d 583 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Matter of Intra-Lata Equal Access 532 N.W.2d 583 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
-78 (Minn.1977); see George A. Beck, et al., Minnesota Administrative Procedure at *590 § 16.6 at 316-20 (comparing rulemaking with policymaking by adjudication).
Contel of Minnesota, Inc. v. Minnesota Public Utilities Commission 532 N.W.2d 583 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
-78 (Minn.1977); see George A. Beck, et al., Minnesota Administrative Procedure at *590 § 16.6 at 316-20 (comparing rulemaking with policymaking by adjudication).
In Re Assessment Issued to Leisure Hills Health Care Center on March 2, 1992 518 N.W.2d 71 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
In Re Assessment Issued to Leisure Hills Health Care Center on March 2, 1992 518 N.W.2d 71 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
See, -78 (Minn.1977) (requiring a policy bulletin allowing reimbursement for certain abortions to be promulgated as rules because it involved a question of social and political policy important to the public); Hanna Mining Co. v. Minnesota Pub.
Thuma v. Kroschel 506 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Thuma v. Kroschel 506 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
In Re Complaint Against the Sandy Pappas Senate Committee 488 N.W.2d 795 Minn. 1992
In Re Complaint Against the Sandy Pappas Senate Committee 488 N.W.2d 795 Minn. 1992
for the proposition that we have expressed a willingness to characterize “injury in fact” broadly in the taxpayer standing context, his reliance on that case is misplaced.
Donovan Contracting of St. Cloud, Inc. v. Minnesota Department of Transportation 469 N.W.2d 718 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Donovan Contracting of St. Cloud, Inc. v. Minnesota Department of Transportation 469 N.W.2d 718 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
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
Hibbing Taconite, d at 894
Contested Cases of St. Otto's Home v. Minnesota Department of Human Services 437 N.W.2d 35 Minn. 1989
Contested Cases of St. Otto's Home v. Minnesota Department of Human Services 437 N.W.2d 35 Minn. 1989
Mankato Aglime & Rock Co. v. City of Mankato 434 N.W.2d 490 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Mankato Aglime & Rock Co. v. City of Mankato 434 N.W.2d 490 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Matter of Hibbing Taconite Co. 431 N.W.2d 885 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Matter of Hibbing Taconite Co. 431 N.W.2d 885 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Contested Case of Christian Nursing Center v. Department of Human Services 419 N.W.2d 86 Minn. Ct. App. 1988