Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Pratt v. State, Department of Natural Resources, 309 N.W.2d 767.

27 citing documents.

Fletcher Properties, Inc., et al., Appellants, vs. City of Minneapolis, Respondent, Poverty & Race Research Action ... Minn. 2025
Fletcher Properties, Inc., et al., Appellants, vs. City of Minneapolis, Respondent, Poverty & Race Research Action ... Minn. 2025
EP Land LLC, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Res., (statewide legislation reclassifying water on a property); -15 (Minn. App. 2010) (city zoning amendment), rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
In the Matter of the Application of Chris Bolton for a Conditional Use Permit. Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Res., d 767, 772 (Minn. 1981).
Ren Xu, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Res., (footnote omitted).
Save Mille Lacs Sportsfishing, Inc. v. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 859 N.W.2d 845 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Save Mille Lacs Sportsfishing, Inc. v. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 859 N.W.2d 845 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
See, e.g., Pratt v. State, Dep’t of Natural Res., Longyear Holding Co., 224 Minn. at 473 , d at 670 ; Nelson v. DeLong, 213 Minn. 425, 431 , review denied (Minn. Jan.
DeCook v. Rochester International Airport Joint Zoning Board 796 N.W.2d 299 Minn. 2011
DeCook v. Rochester International Airport Joint Zoning Board 796 N.W.2d 299 Minn. 2011
(holding that McShane does not apply when the government has physically appropriated property); (holding that McShane does not apply when the government commenced condemnation proceedings to acquire land within a runway Zone A rather than enact land-use regulations); Pratt v. State, Dept. of Natural Res., (finding that State prohibition on mechanical harvesting of wild rice had both enterprise and arbitration functions and stating that in McShane , "the governmental enterprise function of a regu
Wensmann Realty, Inc. v. City of Eagan 734 N.W.2d 623 Minn. 2007
Wensmann Realty, Inc. v. City of Eagan 734 N.W.2d 623 Minn. 2007
See, e.g., Wes tling, d at 823-24 ; Zeman, d at 552 ; Pratt v. State Dep’t of Natural Res.
Magnuson v. Cossette 707 N.W.2d 738 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Magnuson v. Cossette 707 N.W.2d 738 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Pratt v. State, Dep’t of Natural Res.
Bloomquist v. Commissioner of Natural Resources 704 N.W.2d 184 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Bloomquist v. Commissioner of Natural Resources 704 N.W.2d 184 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Pratt v. State, Dep’t of Natural Res.
Larson v. Sando 508 N.W.2d 782 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Larson v. Sando 508 N.W.2d 782 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
See Pratt v. State, Dep’t of Natural Resources, Nelson v. De Long, 213 Minn. 425, 431
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
Because “existing rights” refers to “riparian rights,” and because riparian rights are the rights to use and enjoy water, see Johnson v. Seifert, 257 Minn. 159, 164 , this court’s analysis in Central Baptist I concluded: Building a radio tower is not a riparian right * * * The Commissioner did not err by concluding the seminar
State v. Hart 477 N.W.2d 732 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Hart 477 N.W.2d 732 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Application of Christenson 417 N.W.2d 607 Minn. 1987
Application of Christenson 417 N.W.2d 607 Minn. 1987
We have construed “subject to existing rights” to mean “subject to existing riparian rights.”
Lake Mille Lacs Investment, Inc. v. Payne 401 N.W.2d 387 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Lake Mille Lacs Investment, Inc. v. Payne 401 N.W.2d 387 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
See also Pratt v. State, Department of Natural Resources, (a declaration that waters are “public waters” is subject to existing riparian rights).
In Re the Central Baptist Theological Seminary 370 N.W.2d 642 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
In Re the Central Baptist Theological Seminary 370 N.W.2d 642 Minn. Ct. App. 1985

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by