Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite City of Saint Paul v. Eldredge, 800 N.W.2d 643.

44 citing documents.

Duane Charles Hippe, Jr. v. Dakota County Sheriff Joe Leko Minn. Ct. App. 2026
p. 2019) (“If the statute’s unambiguous language merely produces a troubling result, we must apply it without reference to its drafting history.” (quotation omitted)); (“Because the relevant statutory language is explicit and unambiguous, it is not appropriate for us to consider whether the statutory scheme is absurd.”), aff’d
Nicole Blissenbach, Commissioner, Department of Labor and Industry, State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Paul v. Eldredge , (stating “we read the statute as a whole and turn to statutes relating to the same subject in order that we may avoid conflicting interpretations and give effect to all statutory provisions”).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(recognizing that nonprecedential cases not involving the same legal issue as the case on appeal may not be persuasive authority), aff’d
Ahmad Daniel, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Lynn M. Langer, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Charles A. Laliberte, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Resolution Relating to the Termination and Nonrenewal of the Teaching Contract of a Probationary Teacher. Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(stating “we read the statute as a whole and turn to statutes relating to the same subject in order that we may avoid conflicting interpretations and give effect to all statutory provisions”).
Amber Brown, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
-27 (Minn. App. 2010), aff’d
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
- 27 (Minn. App. 2010), aff’d
EDF-RE US Development, LLC, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
- 27 (Minn. App. 2010), aff’d
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
- 27 (Minn. App. 2010), aff’d
Julie Costello, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
-27 (Minn. App. 2010) (noting that nonprecedential opinions of the court of appeals are not binding authority but may have persuasive value), aff’d
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
The abuse involved 522, 526-27 (Minn. App. 2010) (noting that nonprecedentia l opinions of the court of appeals are not binding authority but may have persuasive value), aff’d
In re Polaris, Inc., Petitioner, Minn. 2021
Dametrius Ratheal Adrian Moore, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
aff’d, (stating “ unpublished cases may have persuasive value”).
Bruce Clark, et al., Minn. 2019
See City of Saint Paul v. Eldredge , (stating that “we read the statute as a whole” and “give effect to all statutory provisions”) .
Linert v. MacDonald 901 N.W.2d 664 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Linert v. MacDonald 901 N.W.2d 664 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
2010) (stating un *670 published opinions are not precedential but “may have persuasive value”), aff’d
State v. Ellis-Strong 899 N.W.2d 531 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Ellis-Strong 899 N.W.2d 531 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
-27 (Minn. App. 2010), aff'd
Anita J. Howard v. Shelly R. Svoboda, M.D. 890 N.W.2d 111 Minn. 2017
Anita J. Howard v. Shelly R. Svoboda, M.D. 890 N.W.2d 111 Minn. 2017
U. S. Bank National Association, as trustee, successor-in-interest to Bank of America, N.A., as trustee, successor to Wells … 888 N.W.2d 699 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
U. S. Bank National Association, as trustee, successor-in-interest to Bank of America, N.A., as trustee, successor to Wells … 888 N.W.2d 699 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
U. S. Bank National Association, as trustee, successor-in-interest to Bank of America, N.A., as trustee, successor to Wells … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
U. S. Bank National Association, as trustee, successor-in-interest to Bank of America, N.A., as trustee, successor to Wells … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Ferdinand Leo Gams, Jr., Respondent/Cross-Appellant v. Steven Ronald Houghton, Appellant/Cross-Respondent. 884 N.W.2d 611 Minn. 2016
Ferdinand Leo Gams, Jr., Respondent/Cross-Appellant v. Steven Ronald Houghton, Appellant/Cross-Respondent. 884 N.W.2d 611 Minn. 2016
(noting that this court has long applied the maxim that when there is an express enumeration of the 7 persons or things to be affected by a particular provision, “there is an implied exclusion of others” (quoting Maytag Co. v. Comm’r of Taxation, 218
Jessica Mattson v. City of Rushford, Minnowa Construction, Inc., State of Minnesota Department of Transportation, Edwards and Kelcey, … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Jessica Mattson v. City of Rushford, Minnowa Construction, Inc., State of Minnesota Department of Transportation, Edwards and Kelcey, … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
-27 (Minn. App. 2010), aff’d
Rahn's Oil & Propane, Inc. v. Ettel Logistics, Inc., ELI Logistics, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Rahn's Oil & Propane, Inc. v. Ettel Logistics, Inc., ELI Logistics, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Alice Ann Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud 853 N.W.2d 713 Minn. 2014
Alice Ann Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud 853 N.W.2d 713 Minn. 2014
Joyce M. Woelfel v. U. S. Bank, National Association Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Joyce M. Woelfel v. U. S. Bank, National Association Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Minnesota Joint Underwriting Ass'n v. Star Tribune Media Co. 849 N.W.2d 421 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Minnesota Joint Underwriting Ass'n v. Star Tribune Media Co. 849 N.W.2d 421 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(stating that “when a statute enumerates the persons or things to be affected by its provisions, there is an implied exclusion of others”).
Stern v. Stern 839 N.W.2d 96 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Stern v. Stern 839 N.W.2d 96 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Ruiz v. 1st Fidelity Loan Servicing, LLC 829 N.W.2d 53 Minn. 2013
Ruiz v. 1st Fidelity Loan Servicing, LLC 829 N.W.2d 53 Minn. 2013
Rohmiller v. Hart 811 N.W.2d 585 Minn. 2012
Rohmiller v. Hart 811 N.W.2d 585 Minn. 2012
§ 645.16 (2010); (citations omitted).