Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Matter of Schmidt, 443 N.W.2d 824.

115 citing documents.

In Re Public Conservatorship of Foster 535 N.W.2d 677 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
A statute bears the presumption of validity, and the “party challenging the constitutionality of the statute has the onus of establishing beyond a reasonable doubt that the statute violates a claimed right.”
Matter of Martin 527 N.W.2d 170 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Matter of Martin 527 N.W.2d 170 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Matter of Blilie 494 N.W.2d 877 Minn. 1993
Matter of Blilie 494 N.W.2d 877 Minn. 1993
With respect to this mootness challenge, however, this case is “capable of repetition yet evading review,” because Minn.Stat.
Baker v. Baker 494 N.W.2d 282 Minn. 1992
Baker v. Baker 494 N.W.2d 282 Minn. 1992
Matter of Blilie 484 N.W.2d 34 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Matter of Blilie 484 N.W.2d 34 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Matter of Zuckerman 477 N.W.2d 523 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Matter of Zuckerman 477 N.W.2d 523 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
We address both appeals, believing the issues raised are “capable of repetition yet evading review.”
Vogt v. Vogt 455 N.W.2d 471 Minn. 1990
Vogt v. Vogt 455 N.W.2d 471 Minn. 1990
Matter of Peterson 446 N.W.2d 669 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Matter of Peterson 446 N.W.2d 669 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
addressed the question whether the new statute deprives a patient of any due process or privacy rights.