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.

State, City of Eden Prairie v. Liepke 403 N.W.2d 252 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
The distinction between governmental and proprietary functions was abolished in Mesaba Aviation Division of Halvorson of Duluth, : Although the governmental-proprietary distinction might once have been a progressive test of the proper circumstances in which to estop the government, we no longer find it a useful tool for that purpose.
Contested Case of Residential Alternatives, Inc. v. Minnesota Department of Human Services 387 N.W.2d 885 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Contested Case of Residential Alternatives, Inc. v. Minnesota Department of Human Services 387 N.W.2d 885 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Mesaba Aviation Division of Halvorson of Duluth
Reiser v. Commissioner of Revenue 369 N.W.2d 2 Minn. 1985
Reiser v. Commissioner of Revenue 369 N.W.2d 2 Minn. 1985
The new rule is that “if justice demands, estoppel can be applied against the government even when it acted in a sovereign capacity if the equities advanced by the individual are sufficiently great.”
Brown v. Minnesota Department of Public Welfare 368 N.W.2d 906 Minn. 1985
Brown v. Minnesota Department of Public Welfare 368 N.W.2d 906 Minn. 1985
The government may be estopped if justice requires, but this court has said that it does not “envision that estoppel will be freely applied against the government.”
State Ex Rel. Haak v. Board of Education of Independent School District No. 625 367 N.W.2d 461 Minn. 1985
State Ex Rel. Haak v. Board of Education of Independent School District No. 625 367 N.W.2d 461 Minn. 1985
(estoppel may be asserted against the state if justice requires).
Beaty v. Minnesota Board of Teaching 354 N.W.2d 466 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Beaty v. Minnesota Board of Teaching 354 N.W.2d 466 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Christensen v. Minneapolis Municipal Employees Retirement Board 331 N.W.2d 740 Minn. 1983
Christensen v. Mpls. Mun. Emp. Retire. Bd. 331 N.W.2d 740 Minn. 1983
Christensen v. Minneapolis Municipal Employees Retirement Board 331 N.W.2d 740 Minn. 1983
(equitable estoppel applies against the state); Construction Supply Co. v. Bostrom Sheet Metal Works, 291 Minn. 113, 120 , (promissory estoppel is “a doctrine based on reliance which courts may use in a proper case to prevent injustice”).
Christensen v. Mpls. Mun. Emp. Retire. Bd. 331 N.W.2d 740 Minn. 1983
(equitable estoppel applies against the state); Construction Supply Co. v. Bostrom Sheet Metal Works, 291 Minn. 113, 120 , (promissory estoppel is "a doctrine based on reliance which courts may use in a proper case to prevent injustice").
Ridgewood Development Co. v. State 294 N.W.2d 288 Minn. 1980
Ridgewood Development Co. v. State 294 N.W.2d 288 Minn. 1980
however, we rejected the governmental-proprietary distinction as a test of the circumstances under which the government could be es-topped and held that, when a party raises a claim of equitable estoppel, “the equities of the circumstances must be examined and the government estopped if justice so require