Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Mesaba Aviation Division of Halvorson of Duluth, Inc. v. County of Itasca, 258 N.W.2d 877.

67 citing documents.

Thomas Davison, et al., Relators, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Mesaba Aviation Div. of Halvorson of Duluth, Inc., v. County of Itasca
In re the Matter of: Verdell Fredrick Borth v. Commissioner, Minnesota Department of Human Services, Carver County Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Matter of: Verdell Fredrick Borth v. Commissioner, Minnesota Department of Human Services, Carver County Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Mesaba Aviation Div. of Halvorson of Duluth, Inc., v. County of Itasca
Bruce Township v. Kevin Schmitz, Nathan A. Baum Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Bruce Township v. Kevin Schmitz, Nathan A. Baum Minn. Ct. App. 2016
County of Washington v. City of Oak Park Heights 818 N.W.2d 533 Minn. 2012
Williams v. Smith 820 N.W.2d 807 Minn. 2012
Williams v. Smith 820 N.W.2d 807 Minn. 2012
of Itasca, (noting that the court does “not envision that estoppel will be freely applied against the government”).
County of Washington v. City of Oak Park Heights 818 N.W.2d 533 Minn. 2012
of Itasca, (rejecting the dichotomy in determining the applicability of equitable es-toppel).
Meriwether Minnesota Land & Timber, LLC v. State 818 N.W.2d 557 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Meriwether Minnesota Land & Timber, LLC v. State 818 N.W.2d 557 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
(“We do not envision that es-toppel will be freely applied against the government.
City of North Oaks v. Sarpal 797 N.W.2d 18 Minn. 2011
City of North Oaks v. Sarpal 797 N.W.2d 18 Minn. 2011
of Itasca, -80 (Minn.1977), and that “estoppel would only be applied against the government ...
City of North Oaks v. Sarpal 784 N.W.2d 857 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
City of North Oaks v. Sarpal 784 N.W.2d 857 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
“Estoppel is available as a defense against the government if the government’s wrongful conduct threatens to work a serious injustice and if the public’s interest would not be unduly damaged by the imposition of estoppel.” Ridgewood, d at 293 (quotation omitted); see also In re Petition of Mesaba Aviation Div. of Halvorson of Duluth
In Re Application for PERA Retirement Benefits of McGuire 756 N.W.2d 517 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
In Re Application for PERA Retirement Benefits of McGuire 756 N.W.2d 517 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Mesaba Aviation Div. of Halvorson of Duluth
Kmart Corp. v. County of Stearns 710 N.W.2d 761 Minn. 2006
Kmart Corp. v. County of Stearns 710 N.W.2d 761 Minn. 2006
Mesaba Aviation Div. of Halvorson of Duluth
Yeh v. County of Cass 696 N.W.2d 115 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Yeh v. County of Cass 696 N.W.2d 115 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Save Lantern Bay v. Cass County Planning Commission 683 N.W.2d 862 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Save Lantern Bay v. Cass County Planning Commission 683 N.W.2d 862 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
When estoppel is asserted against a government agency, “the equities of the circumstances must be examined and the government estopped if justice so requires, weighing in that determination the public interest frustrated by the estoppel.”
Prairie Island Indian Community v. Minnesota Department of Public Safety 658 N.W.2d 876 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Prairie Island Indian Community v. Minnesota Department of Public Safety 658 N.W.2d 876 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Wrongful government conduct is not present where the government’s conduct is “simple inadvertence, mistake, or imperfect conduct.” d at 74 (-81 (Minn.1977)); In re Westling Mfg., Inc., (Minn.App.
State v. Ramirez 597 N.W.2d 575 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
State v. Ramirez 597 N.W.2d 575 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Shetka v. Aitkin County 541 N.W.2d 349 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Shetka v. Aitkin County 541 N.W.2d 349 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Mesaba Aviation Div. of Halvorson of Duluth
Axelson v. Minneapolis Teachers' Retirement Fund Ass'n 532 N.W.2d 594 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Axelson v. Minneapolis Teachers' Retirement Fund Ass'n 532 N.W.2d 594 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Welfare, Saaf v. Duluth Police Pension Relief Ass’n, 240 Minn. 60 , Board ofEduc.
In Re the Liquidation of Excalibur Insurance Co. 519 N.W.2d 494 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
In Re the Liquidation of Excalibur Insurance Co. 519 N.W.2d 494 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Because appellants’ claim is against the Commissioner of Commerce, they also must demonstrate that the government entity engaged in "affirmative misconduct, rather than simple inadvertence, mistake, or imperfect conduct.” REM-Canby, (-81 (Minn.1977)), pet.
Application of Q Petroleum 498 N.W.2d 772 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Application of Q Petroleum 498 N.W.2d 772 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
The government may be es-topped if justice requires, but the Minnesota Supreme Court has said that it does not “envision that estoppel will be freely applied against the government.”
Blaine v. Anoka-Hennepin Independent School District No. 11 498 N.W.2d 309 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Blaine v. Anoka-Hennepin Independent School District No. 11 498 N.W.2d 309 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
the court stated: “We do not envision that estoppel will be freely applied against the government.” In State ex rel.
Contested Cases of Rem-Canby, Inc. v. Minnesota Department of Human Services 494 N.W.2d 71 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Contested Cases of Rem-Canby, Inc. v. Minnesota Department of Human Services 494 N.W.2d 71 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
-81 (Minn.1977); In re Westling Mfg., Inc., pet.
Central Baptist Theological Seminary v. City of New Brighton 487 N.W.2d 528 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Central Baptist Theological Seminary v. City of New Brighton 487 N.W.2d 528 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
(county not es-topped from collecting taxes even though it had given verbal and written assurances to a lessee that property was not subject to taxation).
Leisure Hills of Grand Rapids, Inc. v. Minnesota Department of Human Services 480 N.W.2d 149 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Leisure Hills of Grand Rapids, Inc. v. Minnesota Department of Human Services 480 N.W.2d 149 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Matter of Westling Mfg., Inc. 442 N.W.2d 328 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Matter of Westling Mfg., Inc. 442 N.W.2d 328 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Further, Westling's argument that "fault" is a lesser standard is inconsistent with case law indicating that equitable estoppel is not to be "freely applied against the government," Mesaba Aviation Division of Halvorson of Duluth, and that the party attempting such estoppel "has a heavy burden of proof."
Snyder v. City of Minneapolis 441 N.W.2d 781 Minn. 1989
Snyder v. City of Minneapolis 441 N.W.2d 781 Minn. 1989
this court held the county might have been es-topped from collecting taxes when it gave erroneous tax advice on which the taxpayer relied when entering into a leasehold with the county.
Department of Human Services v. Muriel Humphrey Residences 436 N.W.2d 110 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Department of Human Services v. Muriel Humphrey Residences 436 N.W.2d 110 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
State, City of Eden Prairie v. Liepke 403 N.W.2d 252 Minn. Ct. App. 1987

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by