Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Thonesavanh, 904 N.W.2d 432.

237 citing documents.

In the Matter of the Surveillance and Integrity Review (SIRS) Appeals by Trinity Home Health Care Services and … Minn. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Ryan James Martens Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Ryan James Martens Minn. Ct. App. 2023
One such canon is in pari materia, or the related-statutes canon, which “allows two statutes with common purposes and subject matter to be construed together to determine the meaning of ambiguous statutory language.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Raeleen Kay Johnson, A21-1360, Supreme Court, September 13, 2023 Minn. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Raeleen Kay Johnson, A21-1360, Supreme Court, September 13, 2023 Minn. 2023
When a phrase in a statute is undefined, we may look to dictionary definitions “to determine the common and ordinary meanings of these terms.”
State of Minnesota v. Almanzo Ousley Cotton Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Kyle Allen Mueller Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Almanzo Ousley Cotton Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“The first step in statutory interpretation is to determine whether the statute’s language, on its face, is ambiguous.”
State of Minnesota v. Nicolle Lynn Lozier Minn. Ct. App. 2023
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: S.B.G., Parent Minn. 2023
“The first step in statutory interpretation is to determine whether the statute’s language, on its face, is ambiguous.”
State of Minnesota v. Penny Lane Arredondo Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“A statute is ambiguous only if it is subject to more than one reasonable interpretation.” (quotation omitted).
In the Matter of: Del Zotto Products Minn. Ct. App. 2023
In the Matter of the Application of Timothy D. Moratzka, Trustee of the Nancy L. Mayen Residual Trust Minn. 2023
State of Minnesota, Minn. 2023
“The first step in statutory interpretation is to determine whether the statute’s language, on its face, is ambiguous.”
State of Minnesota, Minn. 2023
In interpreting statutes, we read the statute as a whole, and favor an interpretation that gives “each word or phrase in a statute a distinct, not an identical, meaning,”
State of Minnesota, Minn. 2023
Taquinia Kokela Douglas, Minn. 2023
In the Matter of the Welfare of: D. J. F.-D., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(interpreting a statute); (rules of statutory interpretation are applied to interpret procedural rules).
Melissa Lynn Hanson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2023
In re City of Cohasset’s Decision on the Need for an Environmental Impact Statement for the Proposed Frontier … Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Minnesota Automobile Dealers Association v. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency Minn. Ct. App. 2023
In re the Matter of: Sean Patrick Dempsey v. Martalisbet Horrocks Loman Minn. Ct. App. 2022
(“Also called the related-statutes canon, in pari materia allows two statutes with common purposes and subject matter to be construed together to determine the meaning of ambiguous statutory language.” (quotation omitted)).
Minn. 2022
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: A. R. J. and B. J. J., Parents Minn. Ct. App. 2022
d 119, 122 (Minn. App. 2019).
Bunny Annette Byington, Minn. 2022
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: S. B. G., Parent Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Minn. 2022
Courtney Ann Houck v. Alexander Carson Houck Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Raeleen Kay Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Minn. 2022
See State v. Rick , d 478, 484 (Minn. 2013), d 432, 440–41 (Minn. 2017).
Minnesota Deer Farmers Association v. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Minn. Ct. App. 2022
(noting that in pari mate ria is extrinsic canon that applies only to ambiguous statutes).
State of Minnesota v. Duke Ogeto Maroko Minn. Ct. App. 2022
A21-1528 A21-1530 William Findling, et al v. Group Health Plan, Inc., d/b/a Health Partners and Regions Hospital (A21-1518), … Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Minn. 2022
In re the Estate of: Joann Roselia Gregory, aka JoAnn R. Gregory and aka JoAnn Gregory, Deceased Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Don Lorge, Minn. 2022
State v. Thonesavanh , –38 (Minn. 2017).
In the Matter of the Welfare of: A. J. S., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Carvin Buzzell, Jr., Minn. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Clifford Monroe Skinaway, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2022
“A statute is ambiguous only if it is subject to more than one reasonable interpretation.” (quotation omitted).
Johnsonville, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company v. City of Buffalo, a Minnesota municipal corporation Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Minn. Stat. § 645.16 (2020)
State of Minnesota, Minn. 2022
In the Matter of V & J Farm, LLC and the Commissioner of North Fork Crow River Watershed … Minn. Ct. App. 2022
If the plain language of the statute is open to multiple reasonable interpretations, the statute is ambiguous and the court “may apply canons of construction to resolve the ambiguity.”
State of Minnesota v. Peggy Lynn Nelson Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Minnesota Judicial Branch v. Teamsters Local 320 Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Alonzo Lonnie Jr. Williams Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Minn. 2021
(considering legislative history only after finding the statute ambiguous); State v. Altepeter , (noting that an “illogical” result is only considered if the statute is ambiguous); (stating that the canon of in pari materia “applies only to ambiguous statutes”).
Northeastern Minnesotans for Wilderness v. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, et al., Twin Metals Minnesota LLC, intervenor Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Fairmont Housing and Redevelopment Authority v. Tom Winter, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota v. Bryan Morgan Holl Minn. 2021
If, however, the language of the statute is ambiguous, meaning “it is subject to more than one reasonable interpretation,” we use the applicable canons of construction to ascertain the statute’s meaning and “resolve the ambiguity.” (citations omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).
In the Matter of the Eligibility of Ted Johnson for MSRS General Employees Retirement Plan Coverage Minn. Ct. App. 2021