Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Premier Bank v. BECKER DEVELOPMENT, LLC, 785 N.W.2d 753.

151 citing documents.

American Family Insurance Company a/s/o Nicholas Oelke v. NB Electric, Inc. dba East Side Garage Doors, ... Minn. 2026
See Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC
In re the Matter of: E. M. B., DOB February 14, 2014, Sharo’n Lily Isabella Mathison, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
involves a failure of expression or an ambiguity of expression.” Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC
Kristen M. Egan, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
(quoting Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC, ).
Lighthouse Management Inc., Plaintiff, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Minn. Stat. § 514.01; see also Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC
In re the Custody of: S. E. R. R., DOB 08/07/2002, S. L. R. R., petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
But neither this court nor a district court may “add[] words or meaning to a statute that are purposely omitted or inadvertently overlooked.” Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., L.L.C. , (quotation omitted).
Barbara Jacobson, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC
SW Partners, LLC, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC
Timberwall Landscape & Masonry Products, Inc., Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“But a lien claimant must follow the statutory procedures to perfect a mechanic’s lien.” Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC, d 753, 758 (Minn. 2010).
Ripley Karen Bresson, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
see Rohmiller v. Hart , d 585, 590 (Minn. 2012) (“We cannot add words or meaning to a statute that were intentionally or inadvertently omitted.”); Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC, d 753, 759 (Minn. 2010) (“[I]f the language of a statute is clear and free from ambiguity, our rule is to enforce the language of the statute, and not explore the spirit or purpose of the law.”).
Minn. Dep't of Natural Res. v. Chippewa/Swift Joint Bd. of Commissioners 925 N.W.2d 244 Minn. 2019
Minn. Dep't of Natural Res. v. Chippewa/Swift Joint Bd. of Commissioners 925 N.W.2d 244 Minn. 2019
Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC , , 758 (Minn. 2010).
In re: Rental License Revocation Appeal for Stephen Frenz for properties owned by Equity Residential Holdings, LLC, National … Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Appellate courts interpreting ordi nances must “give words and p hrases their plain and ordinary meaning.” Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC
Great N. Ins. Co. v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc. 911 N.W.2d 510 Minn. 2018
Great N. Ins. Co. v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc. 911 N.W.2d 510 Minn. 2018
See Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC , , 759 (Minn. 2010).
Buskey v. Am. Legion Post 910 N.W.2d 9 Minn. 2018
Buskey v. Am. Legion Post 910 N.W.2d 9 Minn. 2018
See Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC , , 760 (Minn. 2010) ("[S]ilence in a statute regarding a particular topic does not render the statute unclear or ambiguous ....").
In the Appeal of: SH RG For: Northstar Adoption Assistance Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC
In the Matter of: Tracy Elizabeth Thompson and o/b/o Minor Child, Minn. 2018
“The goal of all statutory construction is to effectuate the intent of the legislature.” Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: N. E. R. and W. G. R., Parents Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC
State v. Christensen 901 N.W.2d 648 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
A16-1372 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
This interpretation thus does not offend the principle forbidding courts from “adding words or meaning to a statute that are purposely omitted or inadvertently overlooked,” Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., L.L.C., (citation omitted), or the canon of statutory construction that the expression of one thing is the exclusion of another
A16-2034 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC
Sanchez v. Dahlke Trailer Sales, Inc. 897 N.W.2d 267 Minn. 2017
Sanchez v. Dahlke Trailer Sales, Inc. 897 N.W.2d 267 Minn. 2017
When interpreting a statute, “we give words and phrases their plain and ordinary meaning.” Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC, (citing Minn. Stat. § 645.08 (2016)).
Browder v. State 899 N.W.2d 525 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Browder v. State 899 N.W.2d 525 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Noggle, d at 550 (citing Minn. Stat. § 645.16 (2014); Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC, ).
Jackson ex rel. Sorenson v. Options Residential, Inc. 896 N.W.2d 549 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Jackson ex rel. Sorenson v. Options Residential, Inc. 896 N.W.2d 549 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC
Great Northern Insurance Co. v. Honeywell International, Inc. 895 N.W.2d 255 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Great Northern Insurance Co. v. Honeywell International, Inc. 895 N.W.2d 255 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“[I]f the language of a statute is clear and free from ambiguity, our role is to enforce the language of the statute, and not explore the spirit or purpose of the law.” Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC, see also Minn. Stat. § 645.16 (2016).
State of Minnesota v. Renee Anita Vasko 889 N.W.2d 551 Minn. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Renee Anita Vasko 889 N.W.2d 551 Minn. 2017
When interpreting a statute, “we give words and phrases their plain and ordinary meaning.” Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC, (citing Minn. Stat. § 645.08 (2016)).
State of Minnesota, ex rel. Demetris L. Duncan v. Tom Roy, Commissioner of Corrections 887 N.W.2d 271 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota, ex rel. Demetris L. Duncan v. Tom Roy, Commissioner of Corrections 887 N.W.2d 271 Minn. 2016
When interpreting statutes, we “give words and phrases their plain and ordinary meaning.” Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC
STRIB IV, LLC fka Richard T. Burke I, LLC, Relator v. County of Hennepin 886 N.W.2d 821 Minn. 2016
STRIB IV, LLC fka Richard T. Burke I, LLC, Relator v. County of Hennepin 886 N.W.2d 821 Minn. 2016
A. “[S]ilence in a statute regarding a particular topic does not render the statute unclear or ambiguous unless the statute is susceptible of more than one reasonable interpretation.” Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC
Mary Cocchiarella v. Donald Driggs 884 N.W.2d 621 Minn. 2016
Gila River Indian Community v. Department of Child Safety 379 P.3d 1016 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Gric v. Dcs Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2016
Ryan Contracting Company v. O'Neill & Murphy, LLP 883 N.W.2d 236 Minn. 2016
Ryan Contracting Company v. O'Neill & Murphy, LLP 883 N.W.2d 236 Minn. 2016
Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC, Riverview Muir Doran, LLC v. JADT Dev.
State of Minnesota v. Forrest Grant Noggle 881 N.W.2d 545 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Forrest Grant Noggle 881 N.W.2d 545 Minn. 2016
.”); see Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC, d 753, 760 (Minn. 2010) (“[O]ur rules of construction ‘forbid adding words or meaning to a statute’ that are purposely omitted or inadvertently overlooked.” (quoting Genin v. 1996 Mercury Marquis, )).
In the Matter of the WELFARE OF the Child Of: J.P.-S. and J.D.F., Parents 880 N.W.2d 868 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In the Matter of the WELFARE OF the Child Of: J.P.-S. and J.D.F., Parents 880 N.W.2d 868 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Premier Bank v. 7 Becker Dev., LLC, see also Minn. Stat. § 645.16 (instructing that if the language of a statute is plain and unambiguous, “the letter of the law shall not be disregarded under the pretext of pursuing the spirit”).
Melinda M. Binkley, Trustee on behalf of the heirs and next of kin of Kirk T. Lloyd, II … 877 N.W.2d 547 Minn. 2016
Melinda M. Binkley, Trustee on behalf of the heirs and next of kin of Kirk T. Lloyd, II … 877 N.W.2d 547 Minn. 2016
When interpreting statutes, we “give words and phrases their plain and ordinary meaning.” Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC
Paek Saengkeo v. Minnesota Automobile Assigned Claims 877 N.W.2d 568 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Paek Saengkeo v. Minnesota Automobile Assigned Claims 877 N.W.2d 568 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Premier Bank v. Becker Dev., LLC
Sprinkler Warehouse, Inc. v. Systematic Rain, Inc., d/b/a GPLAWN.com 880 N.W.2d 16 Minn. 2016