Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Goldsworthy v. State, Department of Public Safety, 268 N.W.2d 46.

40 citing documents.

In re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2020
In re the Matter of: Nezha Boutlane, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Safety, (“Due process requires only that notice be reasonably calculated to reac h interested parties.”); Hoff v. N w. Elevator Co., 139 N.W.
Nicholas Bruce Morse v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Nicholas Bruce Morse v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Steven J. Jaeger v. Palladium Holdings, LLC, Franklin Financial, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Steven J. Jaeger v. Palladium Holdings, LLC, Franklin Financial, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Axelberg v. Commissioner of Public Safety 848 N.W.2d 206 Minn. 2014
Axelberg v. Commissioner of Public Safety 848 N.W.2d 206 Minn. 2014
Plocher v. Commissioner of Public Safety 681 N.W.2d 698 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Plocher v. Commissioner of Public Safety 681 N.W.2d 698 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Safety, and McIntee v. State, Dep’t of Pub.
Homan v. Commissioner of Public Safety 663 N.W.2d 568 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Homan v. Commissioner of Public Safety 663 N.W.2d 568 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Safety, 49-50 (Minn.1978).
State v. Rader 597 N.W.2d 321 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Thorson v. Commissioner of Public Safety 519 N.W.2d 490 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Thorson v. Commissioner of Public Safety 519 N.W.2d 490 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Safety, Gardner v. Commissioner of Pub.
Davis v. Commissioner of Public Safety 509 N.W.2d 380 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Davis v. Commissioner of Public Safety 509 N.W.2d 380 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Safety, , 49 n. 4 (Minn.1978) (discussing effect of Prideaux on civil nature of implied consent).
Knudson v. Commissioner of Public Safety 438 N.W.2d 423 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Knudson v. Commissioner of Public Safety 438 N.W.2d 423 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
See Goldsworthy v. State, Department of Public Safety
Har-Ned Lumber Co. v. Amagineers, Inc. 436 N.W.2d 811 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Har-Ned Lumber Co. v. Amagineers, Inc. 436 N.W.2d 811 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
The use of “certified mail fills the function of insuring receipt by a person of suitable age or discretion at the person’s last known address and is thus reasonably calculated to provide notice to the affected person.” Goldsworthy v. State, Department of Public Safety
Travelers Insurance Co. v. Tufte 435 N.W.2d 824 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Travelers Insurance Co. v. Tufte 435 N.W.2d 824 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
(emphasis supplied) (constructive receipt of certified mail is sufficient notice).
Gardner v. Commissioner of Public Safety 423 N.W.2d 110 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Gardner v. Commissioner of Public Safety 423 N.W.2d 110 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
In Goldsworthy v. State, Department of Public Safety, the issue was raised as to whether the petitioner was given proper notice of revocation.
McShane v. Commissioner of Public Safety 377 N.W.2d 479 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
McShane v. Commissioner of Public Safety 377 N.W.2d 479 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
See, e.g., Goldsworthy v. State, Department of Public Safety
Nyflot v. Commissioner of Public Safety 369 N.W.2d 512 Minn. 1985
Casci v. Commissioner of Public Safety 360 N.W.2d 443 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Casci v. Commissioner of Public Safety 360 N.W.2d 443 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
See Goldsworthy v. State, Department of Public Safety
Steinberg v. State, Department of Public Safety 357 N.W.2d 413 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Steinberg v. State, Department of Public Safety 357 N.W.2d 413 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
“Since an implied consent proceeding is civil, rather than criminal, in nature no Fifth Amendment right attaches.” Butler v. Commissioner of Pub *416 lic Safety, citing, Goldsworthy v. State, Department of Public Safety, n. 4 (Minn.1978).
Butler v. Commissioner of Public Safety 348 N.W.2d 827 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Butler v. Commissioner of Public Safety 348 N.W.2d 827 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Safety, , 49 n. 4 (Minn.1978).
Stonewall Insurance Co. v. Horak 325 N.W.2d 134 Minn. 1982
Stonewall Insurance Co. v. Horak 325 N.W.2d 134 Minn. 1982
(use of registered or certified mail fills the function of insuring receipt by a person of suitable age and discretion at the person’s last known address).
State, Department of Public Safety v. Juncewski 308 N.W.2d 316 Minn. 1981
State, Department of Public Safety v. Juncewski 308 N.W.2d 316 Minn. 1981
See, e. g., (the primary thrust of such laws “is remedial and intended to protect public safety on the highway”); State v. Mulvihill, 303 Minn. 361, 363 , (decisions restricting application of implied consent law to be narrowly construed); State v. Beckey, 291 Minn. 483, 487 , d
McIntee v. State, Department of Public Safety 279 N.W.2d 817 Minn. 1979
McIntee v. State, Department of Public Safety 279 N.W.2d 817 Minn. 1979
Safety, is somewhat relevant to a resolution of the issue.