Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Axelberg v. Commissioner of Public Safety, 848 N.W.2d 206.

66 citing documents.

In the Matter of the Unadopted Rule Petition of Swimply; Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Safety, (stating that, “if .
Denise Jean Thordson, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: K. O. and D. W., Commissioner of Human … Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: K. O. and D. W., Commissioner of Human … Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Safety, (“[T]he Legislature, not the judiciary, must be the reviser [of a statute].”).
State of Minnesota v. Logan Hunter Vagle Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Logan Hunter Vagle Minn. Ct. App. 2023
David M. Smith, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Safety, d 206, 209-10 (Minn. 2014) (refusing to allow the affirmative defense of duress in a statutory implied consent proceeding because the specific enumerated defenses in the statute did not 6 Although landlords write that “because the tenants were not paying rent .
Marianna Kretsu Maki, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Safety, superseded by statute, Act of May 22, 2015, ch. 65, § 10, 2015 Minn. Laws 474, 527 (codified at Minn. Stat. § 169A.53, subd.
Mark Arnold Wadekamper, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Safety, -09 (Minn. 2014) (holding that issues a driver may raise at an implied -consent hearing are limited to those falling within topics listed in Minn. Stat. § 169A.53, subd.
State of Minnesota, Minn. 2021
Safety, ( (“What the law ought to be is for the legislature.
Dannielle Zephier, Minn. 2021
Safety, (holding that a driver challenging the 12 revocation of her driver’s license could not raise the common law affirmative defense of necessity because that area of the law had been abrogated by a comprehensive statutory scheme), superseded by statute, Act of May 22, 2015, ch. 65, § 10, 2015 Minn. L
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Joan Elizabeth Toll, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Safety, 4 (holding that appellant could not raise necessit y in an implied-consent petition because, at that time, necessity was not included in the statute) .
Andrew Cilek, et al., Minn. 2020
Safety , (stating that when a statute “needs revision in order to make it embody a more sound public policy, the Legislature, not the j udiciary, must be the reviser”).
Michael Thomas Palke, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Bruce Andrew Olson, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Minn. 2019
Minn. 2019
Safety, (stating that when a statute “needs revision in order to make it embody a more sound public policy, the Legislature, not the Judiciary, must be the reviser”); Buskey v. Am.
State v. Stay 923 N.W.2d 355 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Stay 923 N.W.2d 355 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Safety , , 212 (Minn. 2014) (stating that courts are to read statutes "as they are, not as some argue they should be").
State v. Wood 922 N.W.2d 209 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Wood 922 N.W.2d 209 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Safety , , 213 (Minn. 2014) (Lillehaug, J., dissenting).
Getz v. Peace 918 N.W.2d 233 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Getz v. Peace 918 N.W.2d 233 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Safety , , 213 (Minn. 2014).
Gray v. Comm'r of Pub. Safety 918 N.W.2d 220 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Gray v. Comm'r of Pub. Safety 918 N.W.2d 220 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Safety , , 208 (Minn. 2014).
Diane Phyllis Krekelberg, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Safety, (“Specifically, under Minn. Stat. § 169A.53, subd.
State v. Carson 902 N.W.2d 441 Minn. 2017
State v. Carson 902 N.W.2d 441 Minn. 2017
Safety, (citing In re Estate of Karger, 253 Minn. 542 , (“What the law ought to be is for the [Legislature.”)), superseded by statute, Minn. Stat. 169A.53, subd.
Back v. State 902 N.W.2d 23 Minn. 2017
Back v. State 902 N.W.2d 23 Minn. 2017
Safety, (“In short, if the Implied Consent Law needs revision in order to make it embody a more sound public policy, the Legislature, not the judiciary, must be the reviser.”).
Ralph Ian Richardson, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Safety , d 682, 684 (Minn. App. 2013) , aff’d, .
Michael Paul Tulenchek-Armstrong v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
David Anthony Janssen v. Commissioner of Public Safety 884 N.W.2d 424 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Michael Paul Tulenchek-Armstrong v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
David Anthony Janssen v. Commissioner of Public Safety 884 N.W.2d 424 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Safety, -09 (Minn. 2014) (declining to add a necessity-defense issue to the issues for an implied-consent hearing and noting that revising the statute is a task for the legislature).
Ian Jorgen Crocker v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Ian Jorgen Crocker v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Jodie Kay Raskovich v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Jodie Kay Raskovich v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
J.D. Donovan, Inc. v. Minnesota Department of Transportation 878 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Michael Marshall Johnson, a/k/a Michael Tate Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Michael Marshall Johnson, a/k/a Michael Tate Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Curtis G. and Stacy S. Marks v. Commissioner of Revenue, Relator. 875 N.W.2d 321 Minn. 2016
Yvette Ford v. Minneapolis Public Schools 874 N.W.2d 231 Minn. 2016
Yvette Ford v. Minneapolis Public Schools 874 N.W.2d 231 Minn. 2016
Safety, (“[W]e must read this state’s laws as they are, not as some argue they should be.”); Dukowitz, d at 151-52.
State of Minnesota, Respondent/Cross-Appellant v. Bonnie Ann Lindquist, Appellant/Cross-Respondent. 869 N.W.2d 863 Minn. 2015
Yer Sumner v. Jim Lupient Infiniti and SFM Risk Solutions, North Memorial Health Care and Mercy Hospital, Relators, … Minn. 2015
Sumner v. Jim Lupient Infiniti 865 N.W.2d 706 Minn. 2015
Sumner v. Jim Lupient Infiniti 865 N.W.2d 706 Minn. 2015
Safety, (stating that, when an unambiguous statute "needs revision in order to make it embody a more sound public policy, the Legislature, not the judiciary, must be the reviser”).