Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite CUP Foods, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis, 633 N.W.2d 557.

67 citing documents.

Shelley Schlichting, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
CUP Foods, (applying abuse-of- discretion standard to evidentiary rulings), rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
In the Matter of the Appeal by Kelvin Caga of the Order of the License Revocation of his … Minn. Ct. App. 2026
An agency’s decision is arbitrary and capricious when “it is an exercise of the agency’s will, rather than its judgment, or if the decision is based on whim or is devoid of articulated reasons.” CUP Foods, rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
In the Matter of the Peace Officer License of Jason Michael Sievert, No. 21239. Minn. Ct. App. 2026
An agency’s decision is arbitrary and capricious when “it is an exercise of the agency’s will, rather than its judgment, or if the decision is based on whim or is devoid of articulated reasons.” CUP Foods, rev. denied 15 (Minn. Nov.
Tanya Hipkins, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Surcharge Appeals, see also CUP Foods, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis , rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
Tamer K. Embaby, Relator v. Department of Treasury, Department of Employment and Economic Development, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Tamer K. Embaby, Relator v. Department of Treasury, Department of Employment and Economic Development, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2026
CUP Foods, rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
In the Matter of the Teaching License of Raquel M. Andrade. Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Cf. GH Holdings, LLC v. Minn. Dep’t of Com., (stating procedures in contested-case hearing “are the incidents of a trial” (quotation omitted)); CUP Foods, (holding due-process rights satisfied when relator received notice, a neutral ALJ, a trial-type hearing, and an ALJ report based on record), rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
Teresa McDonald, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
CUP Foods, rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
In re the Matter of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“An agency decision is arbitrary and capricious if it is an exercise of the agency ’s will, rather than its judgment, or if the decision is based on whim or is devoid of articulated reasons.” CUP Foods, rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
Christopher Humphrey, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Decisions of administrative agencies, including cities, generally “enjoy a presumption of correctness.” CUP Foods, rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
Zutz Farms, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
CUP Foods, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis , rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
In the Matter of the Appeal by Kehinde Yusuf and Caring for Adults of the Order of License … Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In the Matter of the Appeal by Kehinde Yusuf and Caring for Adults of the Order of License … Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“An agency decision is arbitrary and capricious if it is an exercise of the agency’s will, rather than its judgment, or if the decision is based on whim or is devoid of articulated reasons.” CUP Foods, rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
KSR Investment, LLC, et al., Relators, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
DECISION As a general rule, we afford a presumption of correctness to the decisions of administrative agencies and cities, and will reverse them “only when they reflect an error 4 of law or where the findings are arbitrary, capricious, or unsupported by substantial evidence.” CUP Foods, rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
In the Matter of the Appeal by Primrose School of Arden Hills and Shoreview of the Order of … Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In the Matter of the Appeal by Primrose School of Arden Hills and Shoreview of the Order of … Minn. Ct. App. 2024
A decision is arbitrary or capricious “if it is an exercise of the agency’s will, rather than its judgment, or if the decision is based on whim or is devoid of articulated reasons.” Pfoser, d at 308 (quoting CUP Foods, rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
In the Matter of Stevens County for a Conditional Use Permit. Minn. Ct. App. 2023
of Comm’rs, see also CUP Foods, rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
In the Matter of the Cigarette/Tobacco - Product Shop License held by Bright Star Inc. d/b/a/ Tom and … Minn. Ct. App. 2023
5 DECISION “Generally, decisions of administrative agencies, including cities, enjoy a presumption of correctness and will be reversed only when they reflect an error of law or where the findings are arbitrary, capricious, or unsupported by substantial evidence.” CUP Foods, rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
Anoka County, Anoka, Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“Substantial evidence” is: “(1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; and (5) evidence considered in its entirety.” CUP Foods, Inc. , rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
Anoka County, Anoka, Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Agency decision s “will be reversed only when they reflec t an error of law or where the findings are arbitrary, capricious, or unsupported by substantial evidence.” CUP Foods, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis , rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
In the Matter of Walter Smith’s Termination of Section 8 Benefits. Minn. Ct. App. 2022
CUP Foods, rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
Brandon L. Siems, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
CUP Foods, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis , rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
In the Matter of the Application of Impact Power Solutions, LLC and MN CSG 2019-29 LLC for a … Minn. Ct. App. 2022
CUP Foods, rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
Karen M. Erickson, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
CUP Foods, rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
In re: County Board action notice on interim use permit request to operate a kennel on Parcel Number … Minn. Ct. App. 2022
.” CUP Foods, rev. denied (Minn. Nov.
Myth Live II, Inc., Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
In the Matter of the Application of United States Solar Corporation and USS Water Fowl Solar LLC for … Minn. Ct. App. 2021
of Minneapolis, review denied (Minn. Nov.
In the Matter of the Cigarette/Tobacco and Gas Station licenses held by Midway University & Hamline, LLC d/b/a … Minn. Ct. App. 2021
“Sufficient due process generally requires reasonable notice and a hearing.” CUP Foods, review denied (Minn. Nov.
In the Matter of the Application of Minnesota Power for Authority to Increase Rates for Electric Service in … Minn. Ct. App. 2019
CUP Foods, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis
In re the Matter of: Sharon K. Fostervold, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
6(g); see also CUP Foods, (providing that receipt of notice of a hearing is sufficient to satisfy the reasonable notice requirement of due process), review denied (Minn. Nov.
In the Matter of Sharon Beth Johnson, APRN-CNP, RN RN License No. 197878-8 APRN License No. 3516. Minn. Ct. App. 2018
CUP Foods, review denied (Minn. Nov.
Jody L. Wiza, d/b/a Shack Bar, LLC, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“Substantial evidence, for the purpose of a ppellate review of an administ rative agency’s decision, is: (1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a sc intilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; and (5) evidence considered in its entirety.” CUP Foods
In the Matter of Julitta Adu-Gyamfi, R.N., L.P.N., R.N. License No. 184096-8, L.P.N. License No. 58788-2. Minn. Ct. App. 2018
CUP Foods, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis , review denied (Minn. Nov.
Gregory Mailand, et al., Relators, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
license[].” CUP Foods, review denied (Minn. Nov.
Eileen Henderson, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Substantial evidence is: “(1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; and (5) evidence considered in its entirety.” CUP Foods, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis , review denied (Minn. Nov.
In the Matter of the Teaching License of Scott Selmer Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“Sufficient due process generally requires reasonable notice and a hearing.” CUP Foods, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis , review denied (Minn. Nov.
In the Matter of Days Inn West (7851 Normandale Boulevard) Nuisance Service Call Fee issued April 4, 2016 … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
D E C I S I O N “Generally, decision s of administrative agencies, including cities, enjoy a presumption of correctness and will be reversed only when they reflect an error of law or where the findings are arbitrary, capricious, or unsupported by substantial evidence.” CUP Foods, review denied (Minn. Nov.
In the Matter of the Wetland Conservation Act appeal filed by William T. Fisher of a no-loss decision, … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In the Matter of the Wetland Conservation Act appeal filed by William T. Fisher of a no-loss decision, … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
CUP Foods, review denied (Minn. Nov.
Appeal of John Krenik to a Vehicle-abatement order at 1270 Cleveland Avenue. 884 N.W.2d 913 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Appeal of John Krenik to a Vehicle-abatement order at 1270 Cleveland Avenue. 884 N.W.2d 913 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
City council decisions “enjoy a presumption of correctness and will be reversed only when they reflect an error of law or when the findings are arbitrary, capricious, or unsupported by substantial evidence.” CUP Foods, 6 (Minn. App. 2001), review denied (Minn. Nov.
Ever Cat Fuels, LLC, Relator v. Ken Peterson, Commissioner, Department of Labor and Industry, State of Minnesota, Occupational … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Ever Cat Fuels, LLC, Relator v. Ken Peterson, Commissioner, Department of Labor and Industry, State of Minnesota, Occupational … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Cup Foods, review denied (Minn. Nov.
Kasele Howard, Relator v. Family First Home Care, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Kasele Howard, Relator v. Family First Home Care, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“Evidentiary rulings in administrative proceedings are subject to an abuse-of-discretion standard.” CUP Foods, review denied (Minn. Nov.
In the Matter of all Licenses Held by Pet Motortech, Inc., d/b/a Pet Auto Repair, for the premises … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In the Matter of all Licenses Held by Pet Motortech, Inc., d/b/a Pet Auto Repair, for the premises … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“Generally, decisions of administrative agencies, including cities, enjoy a presumption of correctness and will be reversed only when they reflect an error of law or where the findings are arbitrary, capricious, or unsupported by substantial evidence.” CUP Foods, review denied (Minn. Mar.
Deborah Brakefield, Relator v. IND. School District 2889, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Deborah Brakefield, Relator v. IND. School District 2889, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2014
7(d)(4), (5) (2014)).3 Substantial evidence “is: (1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; and (5) evidence considered in its entirety.” CUP Foods, review denied (Minn. Nov.
Lennis Bentrud, Relator v. Robin Drug Corp., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2014