Cited by

6 6 To support its proposed interpretation if the statute is ambiguous, -05 (Minn. 2011), for the proposition that “ [t]he prior construction canon provides that the Court’s prior interpretations of a statute guide the Court in determining its meaning.” But in Engquist, and the cases it cites, the supreme court relied on prior interpretations of the same statute, not the meaning o

d at 831 n.7; (stating that because the Legislature did not amend the dog-bite statute after we interpreted the statute’s provocation element, we “assume that the Legislature has acquiesced in our interpretation”).

(“Because the Legislature has not acted, we assume that the Legislature has acquiesced in our interpretation.”).

Engquist v. Loyas , State, Dep’t of Pub.

Engquist v. Loyas , , 404-05 (Minn. 2011).

*692 Engquist v. Loyas , , 403, 407 (Minn. 2011).

Engquist v. Loyas , , 404-05 (Minn. 2011).

Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc., ().

“[T]he interpretation of a statute is a question of law that we review de novo.”

9(1) (2012) (“When criminal intent is an element of a crime in this chapter, such intent is indicated by the term ‘intentionally,’ the phrase ‘with intent to,’ the phrase ‘with intent that,’ or some form of the verbs ‘know’ or ‘believe.’”); (stating that, because the legislature did not amend the applicable statute in response to the supreme court’s interpretation, “we assume that the [l]egislature has acquiesced in our interpretation”).

“[Appellate courts] begin statutory interpretation with the plain language of the statute,” but a “previous interpretation of a statute guides [appellate courts] in determining its meaning,” – 05 (Minn. 2011).

See, (stating that “[b]ecause the Legislature has not acted, we assume that the Legislature has acquiesced in our interpretation” of a statute).1 Critically important, a maintenance obligee is not without an avenue by which to enforce a maintenance award.

(stating that, because legislature did not amend statute in response to supreme court’s interpretation, “we assume that the Legislature has acquiesced in our interpretation”); State, Dep’t of Pub.