Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Contos v. Herbst, 278 N.W.2d 732.

82 citing documents.

Application of Christenson 417 N.W.2d 607 Minn. 1987
Application of Christenson 417 N.W.2d 607 Minn. 1987
In Re Tveten 402 N.W.2d 551 Minn. 1987
In Re Tveten 402 N.W.2d 551 Minn. 1987
Metropolitan Rehabilitation Services, Inc. v. Westberg 386 N.W.2d 698 Minn. 1986
Metropolitan Rehabilitation Services, Inc. v. Westberg 386 N.W.2d 698 Minn. 1986
appeal dismissed sub nom., Prest v. Herbst, 444 U.S. 804 , 100 S.Ct.
State v. Westrum 380 N.W.2d 187 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Westrum 380 N.W.2d 187 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
However, there is a presumption that the enactment is constitutional, and it will not be declared void for vagueness unless it “is so uncertain and indefinite that after exhausting all rules of construction it is impossible to ascertain legislative intent.”
Troupe v. Sunrise Electric, Inc. 360 N.W.2d 633 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Troupe v. Sunrise Electric, Inc. 360 N.W.2d 633 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
appeal dismissed, 444 U.S. 804 , 160 S.Ct.
In Re the Welfare of B.C. 356 N.W.2d 328 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
In Re the Welfare of B.C. 356 N.W.2d 328 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
A statute should be upheld as ' against a void-for-vagueness challenge unless the terms are “so uncertain and indefinite that after exhausting all rules of construction, it is impossible to ascertain 'the legislature’s intent.” appeal dismissed sub nom, Prest v. Herbst, 444 U.S. 804 , 100 S.Ct.
Odell v. City of Eagan 348 N.W.2d 792 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Odell v. City of Eagan 348 N.W.2d 792 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Manufactured Housing Institute v. Pettersen 347 N.W.2d 238 Minn. 1984
Manufactured Housing Institute v. Pettersen 347 N.W.2d 238 Minn. 1984
563 (1955); appeal dismissed sub nom., Prest v. Herbst, 444 U.S. 804 , 100 S.Ct.
McGuire v. C & L RESTAURANT INC. 346 N.W.2d 605 Minn. 1984
McGuire v. C & L RESTAURANT INC. 346 N.W.2d 605 Minn. 1984
736 *612 (Minn. 1979), appeal dismissed sub nom., Prest v. Herbst, 444 U.S. 804 , 100 S.Ct.
Boline v. Doty 345 N.W.2d 285 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Boline v. Doty 345 N.W.2d 285 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
780 , 28 L.Ed.2d 113 (1971)
County of St. Louis v. Federal Land Bank of St. Paul 338 N.W.2d 741 Minn. 1983
County of St. Louis v. Federal Land Bank of St. Paul 338 N.W.2d 741 Minn. 1983
§ 2055 ); and (2) the tax is unconstitutional notwithstanding this court’s appeal dismissed sub nom.
Hegenes v. State 328 N.W.2d 719 Minn. 1983
Hegenes v. State 328 N.W.2d 719 Minn. 1983
United States Steel Corp. v. State 324 N.W.2d 638 Minn. 1982
United States Steel Corp. v. State 324 N.W.2d 638 Minn. 1982
1278 , 36 L.Ed.2d 16 (1973); appeal dismissed sub.
Reserve Mining Co. v. State 310 N.W.2d 487 Minn. 1981
Reserve Mining Co. v. State 310 N.W.2d 487 Minn. 1981
There is, as the state points out, no requirement that a property tax be related to the value of the property, -40 (Minn.1979), if the tax is “uniform upon the same class of subjects,” Minn.Const.
Commissioner of Revenue v. Richardson 302 N.W.2d 23 Minn. 1981
Commissioner of Revenue v. Richardson 302 N.W.2d 23 Minn. 1981
appeal dismissed, 444 U.S. 804, 100 S.Ct.
Guilliams v. Commissioner of Revenue 299 N.W.2d 138 Minn. 1980
Guilliams v. Commissioner of Revenue 299 N.W.2d 138 Minn. 1980
5 There is, of course, a presumption in favor of the constitutionality of the statute, and the challengers “have the burden to show beyond a reasonable doubt that the act conflicts with the uniformity clause of the state constitution.”