Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Mark R. Zweber v. Credit River Township, 882 N.W.2d 605.

33 citing documents.

A Resolution Reaffirming the Issuance of a Cannabis Retail Registration to Jigar Patel, DBA Nature Creation. Minn. Ct. App. 2026
3 “Decisions are legislative if they have broad applicability and affect the rights of the public generally.” (quotation omitted).
Jacob Schlichter, et al., Relators, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
A decision is quasi-judicial if the decision “affect[s] the rights of a few individuals analogous to the way they are affected by court proceedings.” (quotation omitted); accord Reetz v. City of St.
Bradley Neyens, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
In re Defense and Indemnification of Alexander Vladimir Brown Minn. Ct. App. 2025
In re Defense and Indemnification of Alexander Vladimir Brown Minn. Ct. App. 2025
2 “Decisions are legislative if they have broad applicability and affect the rights of the public generally.” (quotation omitted).
In re Calm Waters Cannabis Co., et al., Petitioners, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
And we stated that “the petition raises a significant issue regarding district court jurisdiction over claims that relate to quasi-judicial decisions,”
Robert Sanden, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“Subject-matter jurisdiction refers to a court’ s authority to hear and determine a particular class of actions and the particular questions presented to the court for its decision.” (quotation omitted).
Ali Alfureedy, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Zweber v. Credit River T ownship
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
See Zweber v. Credit River Township
Allison Schaber, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Subject-matter jurisdiction involves “a court’s authority to hear and determine a particular class of actions and the particular questions presented to the court for its decision.” (quotation omitted).
Eric Reetz, Minn. 2021
“In general, quasi-judicial decisions ‘affect the rights of a few individuals analogous to the way they are af fected by court proceedings.’ ” (quoting Interstate Power Co. v. Nobles Cnty.
Essar Global Fund Limited, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“Subject-matter jurisdiction refers to a court’s authority to hear and determine a particular class of actions and the particular questions presented to the court for its decision.” (citation and internal quotations omitted).
Diane Mast, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
A. “Subject-matter jurisdiction refers to a court’s authority to hear and determine a particular class of actions and the particular questions presented to the court for its decision.” Zweber v. Credit River T ownship, (quotations omitted).
Robert F. Goerdt, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“Subject-matter jurisdiction refers to a court’s authority to hear and determine a particular class of actions and the particular questions presented to the court for its decision.” Zweber v. Credit River T wp., (quotations omitted).
Eric D. Humphreys, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Mark R. Zweber, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
WL 1128985, at *2 (Minn. App. Mar.
Paul King, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
District courts do not have subject-matter jurisdiction over claims that must be resolved in a certiorari appeal.” -09 (Minn. 2016).
In the Matter of: HarborView Mortgage Loan Trust 2005-10. Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“Subject-matter jurisdiction refers to a court’s authority to hear and determine a particular class of actions and the particular questions presented to the court for its decision.” d 605, 608 (Minn. 2016) (quotations omitted).
State of Minnesota, Department of Corrections, employer, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
(noting that this court cannot weigh evidence as a trier of fact in a certiorari appeal).
Julia Wang, d/b/a Orchid Massage Spa, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
See Zweber v. Credit River Twp .
In re the Commercial Dog or Cat Breeder License Issued to Deborah Rowell for Country Pride Kennel Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Cox v. Mid-Minnesota Mut. Ins. Co. 909 N.W.2d 540 Minn. 2018
Cox v. Mid-Minnesota Mut. Ins. Co. 909 N.W.2d 540 Minn. 2018
Dr. Jonathan Peterson, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
The supreme court has also stated that “[d]istrict courts do not have subject -matter jurisdiction over claims that must be resolved in a certiorari appeal.”
Laymon v. Minnesota Premier Properties, LLC 903 N.W.2d 6 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Laymon v. Minnesota Premier Properties, LLC 903 N.W.2d 6 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Itasca County, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
d 605, 609 (Minn. 2016) (citing Dokmo v. Indep.
Margots Kapacs, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Bicking v. City of Minneapolis 891 N.W.2d 304 Minn. 2017
In the Matter of the Denial of Rental Dwelling Licenses to Compass Rose Real Estate, LLC, and North … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In the Matter of the Denial of Rental Dwelling Licenses to Compass Rose Real Estate, LLC, and North … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Steven R. Saba v. City of Fridley Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Steven R. Saba v. City of Fridley Minn. Ct. App. 2016
City of Minneapolis v. Meldahl, 607 N.W.d 168, 172 (Minn. App. 2000)