Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc., 820 N.W.2d 826.

212 citing documents.

Nielsen v. 2003 Honda Accord 845 N.W.2d 754 Minn. 2013
Nielsen v. 2003 Honda Accord 845 N.W.2d 754 Minn. 2013
Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
Karl v. Uptown Drink, LLC 835 N.W.2d 14 Minn. 2013
Karl v. Uptown Drink, LLC 835 N.W.2d 14 Minn. 2013
Once we interpret a statute, our interpretation “becomes part of the statute as though written therein.” Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc., (citing Sandal v. Tollman Oil Co., 298 Minn. 264, 268 , ).
Christianson v. Henke 831 N.W.2d 532 Minn. 2013
Christianson v. Henke 831 N.W.2d 532 Minn. 2013
We have stated that the “goal of all statutory interpretation is to ‘ascertain and effectuate the intention of the legislature.’ ” Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc., (quoting Minn.Stat.
Northern States Power Co. ex rel. Board of Directors v. Aleckson 831 N.W.2d 303 Minn. 2013
Northern States Power Co. ex rel. Board of Directors v. Aleckson 831 N.W.2d 303 Minn. 2013
When a statute’s language is “clear and free from all ambiguity, the letter of the law shall not be disregarded under the pretext of pursuing the spirit.” Id,.; accord Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
Schmitz v. United States Steel Corp. 831 N.W.2d 656 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Schmitz v. United States Steel Corp. 831 N.W.2d 656 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
City of Moorhead v. Red River Valley Cooperative Power Ass'n 830 N.W.2d 32 Minn. 2013
City of Moorhead v. Red River Valley Cooperative Power Ass'n 830 N.W.2d 32 Minn. 2013
The City’s argument presents a question of statutory interpretation, which “is a question of law that we review de novo.” Caldas v. Affordable Granite & *37 Stone, Inc.