Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite S.M. Hentges & Sons, Inc. v. Mensing, 777 N.W.2d 228.

36 citing documents.

Erin Lindsay v. Minneapolis Public School District (SSD1), Self-Insured, Relator Minn. 2025
Erin Lindsay v. Minneapolis Public School District (SSD1), Self-Insured, Relator Minn. 2025
Hentges & Sons, n.1 (Minn. 2010) (concluding that a headnote added years after a provision’s enactment “was not part of the original legislative process” and therefore was “not relevant” to the court’s analysis).
Charlene Karen Jundt v. Marcus Edward Jundt Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Charlene Karen Jundt v. Marcus Edward Jundt Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Adam Dowd, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Hentges & Sons, (“Remedial statutes are generally entitled to liberal construction in favor of the remedy the statutes provide or the class they benefit.”).
S. M. Hentges & Sons, Inc., Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Landform Professional Services, LLC, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Carvin Buzzell, Jr., Minn. 2022
Hentges & Sons, n.1 (Minn. 2010) (stating that headnote was not relevant when it was not part of the original legislative process).
Alan Lee Cimbura, Plaintiff, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Hentges & Sons, d 228, 231 n.1 (Minn. 2010) (“A headnote is only relevant, then, if pr esent in the original legislative process.”).
Axia Contracting, LLC, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Hentges & Sons, Inc. v. Mensing
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Hentges & Sons, Inc. v. Mensing
Phone Recovery Servs., LLC v. Qwest Corp. 919 N.W.2d 315 Minn. 2018
Steven J. Jaeger v. Palladium Holdings, LLC, Franklin Financial, LLC 884 N.W.2d 601 Minn. 2016
Steven J. Jaeger v. Palladium Holdings, LLC, Franklin Financial, LLC 884 N.W.2d 601 Minn. 2016
Hentges & Sons, (stating that remedial statutes are given a liberal construction when they are ambiguous).
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
Hentges & Sons, see also Billion v. Comm’r of Revenue, (stating that rules of strict or liberal construction apply only when a statute is ambiguous).
Ryan Contracting Company v. O'Neill & Murphy, LLP 868 N.W.2d 473 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Ryan Contracting Company v. O'Neill & Murphy, LLP 868 N.W.2d 473 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
The Janice Kaunas Samsing Revocable Trust v. Arthur D. Walsh Minn. Ct. App. 2015
The Janice Kaunas Samsing Revocable Trust v. Arthur D. Walsh Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State v. Stall 845 N.W.2d 246 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Stall 845 N.W.2d 246 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re Minnesota Power for Authority to Increase Rates for Electric Service in Minnesota 838 N.W.2d 747 Minn. 2013
In re Minnesota Power for Authority to Increase Rates for Electric Service in Minnesota 838 N.W.2d 747 Minn. 2013
Hentges & Sons, (“If a statute’s words are clear and unambiguous as applied to an existing situation, we construe the words according to their common and approved usage.”).
Engineering & Construction Innovations, Inc. v. L.H. Bolduc Co. 825 N.W.2d 695 Minn. 2013
Engineering & Construction Innovations, Inc. v. L.H. Bolduc Co. 825 N.W.2d 695 Minn. 2013
Hentges & Sons, *711 (Minn.2010).
Eclipse Architectural Group, Inc. v. Lam 814 N.W.2d 692 Minn. 2012
Eclipse Architectural Group, Inc. v. Lam 814 N.W.2d 692 Minn. 2012
Minnwest Bank v. Arends 802 N.W.2d 412 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Minnwest Bank v. Arends 802 N.W.2d 412 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Premier Bank v. BECKER DEVELOPMENT, LLC 785 N.W.2d 753 Minn. 2010
Premier Bank v. BECKER DEVELOPMENT, LLC 785 N.W.2d 753 Minn. 2010
Dahlin v. Kroening 784 N.W.2d 406 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Swanson v. Brewster 784 N.W.2d 264 Minn. 2010
Peoplenet Communications Corp. v. Baillon Ventures, LLC 781 N.W.2d 584 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Peoplenet Communications Corp. v. Baillon Ventures, LLC 781 N.W.2d 584 Minn. Ct. App. 2010