Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State Ex Rel. Humphrey v. Philip Morris Inc., 551 N.W.2d 490.

157 citing documents.

In Re Consolidated Hospital Surcharge Appeals of GILLETTE CHILDREN’S SPECIALTY HEALTHCARE, St. Luke’s Hospital, North Memorial Health Care, … 883 N.W.2d 778 Minn. 2016
Under Minnesota law, “[s]tanding is acquired in two ways: either the plaintiff has suffered some ‘injury-in-fact’ or the plaintiff is the beneficiary of some legislative enactment granting standing.”
Anthony Hernandez v. Minnesota Board of Teaching Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Anthony Hernandez v. Minnesota Board of Teaching Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Standing requires “that a party ha[ve] a sufficient stake in a justiciable controversy to seek relief from a court.”
In re the Estate of: Bernice R. Murray aka Bernice Murray Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Estate of: Bernice R. Murray aka Bernice Murray Minn. Ct. App. 2016
d 490, 493 (Minn. 1996).
Erik Finstad v. Ride Auto, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Erik Finstad v. Ride Auto, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Dennis Simmons, d at 340.
John Osmanski v. James and Jean Way d/b/a J & J Real Estate Properties, Shakopee Distribution Services, LLC, … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
John Osmanski v. James and Jean Way d/b/a J & J Real Estate Properties, Shakopee Distribution Services, LLC, … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“[A] person may, by conduct, assume a duty where one did not previously exist and be liable for the failure to exercise due care in the performance of that duty.”
Minnesota Voters Alliance v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Minnesota Voters Alliance v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“Standing is the requirement that a party has a sufficient stake in a justiciable controversy to seek relief from a court.”
Save Mille Lacs Sportsfishing, Inc. v. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 859 N.W.2d 845 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Save Mille Lacs Sportsfishing, Inc. v. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 859 N.W.2d 845 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“Standing is the requirement that a party has a sufficient stake in a justiciable controversy to seek relief from a court.”
Elfi E. Janssen v. Lommen, Abdo, Cole, King & Stageberg, P. A., Sibley Holdings, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Elfi E. Janssen v. Lommen, Abdo, Cole, King & Stageberg, P. A., Sibley Holdings, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
DECISION I. “Standing is the requirement that a party has a sufficient stake in a justiciable controversy to seek relief from a court.”
In Re the GUARDIANSHIP OF Jeffers J. TSCHUMY, Ward 853 N.W.2d 728 Minn. 2014
In the matter of the Petition of Melrose Community, LLC for a revision of the legal descriptions reflected … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In the matter of the Petition of Melrose Community, LLC for a revision of the legal descriptions reflected … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“Standing is the requirement that a party has a sufficient stake in a justiciable controversy to seek relief from a court.”
In re Application of Gourley Brothers, LLC for a Water Appropriation Permit. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Great Southern Bank v. Gustavo Aguilar Guzman Minn. Ct. App. 2014
George Reilly, as trustee of the Nathan L. Bentson 1993 Irrevocable Trust v. Michael J. Antonello 852 N.W.2d 694 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re Application of Gourley Brothers, LLC for a Water Appropriation Permit. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“Standing is the requirement that a party has a sufficient stake in a justiciable controversy to seek relief from a court.” State v. Philip Morris, Inc., (citing Sierra Club v. Morton, 405 U.S. 727, 731-32, 92 S. Ct. 1361, 3 1364-65 (1972)).
Great Southern Bank v. Gustavo Aguilar Guzman Minn. Ct. App. 2014
To have standing to bring a lawsuit, a party must either have “suffered some ‘injury-in-fact’” or be “the beneficiary of some legislative enactment granting standing,” such that the party “has a sufficient stake in a justiciable controversy to seek relief from a court.”
George Reilly, as trustee of the Nathan L. Bentson 1993 Irrevocable Trust v. Michael J. Antonello 852 N.W.2d 694 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“Standing is the requirement that a party has a sufficient stake in a justiciable controversy to seek relief from a court.”
Medical Staff of Avera Marshall Regional Medical Center v. Avera Marshall 836 N.W.2d 549 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Medical Staff of Avera Marshall Regional Medical Center v. Avera Marshall 836 N.W.2d 549 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Assuming, for the sake of our discussion, that the medical staff is a legal entity with capacity to sue, standing will be acquired either when “the plaintiff has suffered some ‘injury-in-fact’ or the plaintiff is the beneficiary of some legislative enactment granting standing.” State by Humphrey *559 v. Philip Morris Inc.
Graphic Communications Local 1B Health & Welfare Fund "A" v. CVS Caremark Corp. 833 N.W.2d 403 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Graphic Communications Local 1B Health & Welfare Fund "A" v. CVS Caremark Corp. 833 N.W.2d 403 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Air Prods., Inc., aff'd see also Nystrom, d at 308 (“We recently observed that the [MCFA] ‘reflects] a clear legislative policy encouraging aggressive prosecution of statutory violations’ and thus should be ‘generally very broadly construed to enhance consumer protection.’ ” (-96 (Minn.1996))).
League of Women Voters Minnesota v. Ritchie 819 N.W.2d 636 Minn. 2012
League of Women Voters Minnesota v. Ritchie 819 N.W.2d 636 Minn. 2012
To have standing a party must have "a sufficient stake in a justiciable controversy to seek relief from a court.” State by Humphrey V. Philip Morris, Inc.
Builders Ass'n v. City of St. Paul 819 N.W.2d 172 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Builders Ass'n v. City of St. Paul 819 N.W.2d 172 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
-98 (Minn.1996); Minneapolis Fed’n of Teachers, Local 59 v. Special Sch.
Glorvigen v. Cirrus Design Corp. 816 N.W.2d 572 Minn. 2012
Bearder v. State 788 N.W.2d 144 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Bearder v. State 788 N.W.2d 144 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
(stating that "[t]he requirements of a tort claim” include "that the plaintiff did in fact suffer injury”).
Krueger v. Zeman Construction Co. 781 N.W.2d 858 Minn. 2010
Krueger v. Zeman Construction Co. 781 N.W.2d 858 Minn. 2010
Citizens for Rule of Law v. Senate Committee on Rules & Administration 770 N.W.2d 169 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Citizens for Rule of Law v. Senate Committee on Rules & Administration 770 N.W.2d 169 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
JEM ACRES, LLC v. Bruno 764 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
JEM ACRES, LLC v. Bruno 764 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
A party acquires standing in one of two ways: “either the plaintiff has suffered some injury-in-fact or the plaintiff is the beneficiary of some legislative enactment granting standing.” (quotation omitted).
Krueger v. Zeman Construction Co. 758 N.W.2d 881 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Krueger v. Zeman Construction Co. 758 N.W.2d 881 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
“Standing is the requirement that a party has a sufficient stake in a justiciable controversy to seek relief from a court.” State by Humphrey v. Philip Morris, Inc.
Olson v. State 742 N.W.2d 681 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Olson v. State 742 N.W.2d 681 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Lorix v. Crompton Corp. 736 N.W.2d 619 Minn. 2007
Lorix v. Crompton Corp. 736 N.W.2d 619 Minn. 2007
The private causes of action created by Minnesota antitrust law “reflect a clear legislative policy encouraging aggressive prosecution of statutory violations.”
State Ex Rel. Sviggum v. Hanson 732 N.W.2d 312 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State Ex Rel. Sviggum v. Hanson 732 N.W.2d 312 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
(linking standing to availability of relief); (noting that case is moot if courts cannot “grant effectual relief’); see also Baker v. Carr, 369 U.S. 186, 217 , 82 S.Ct.
In Re Petition for Decertification 730 N.W.2d 300 Minn. Ct. App. 2007

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by