Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Interstate Power Co. v. Nobles County Board of Commissioners, 617 N.W.2d 566.

246 citing documents.

Frank-Bretwisch v. Ryan 741 N.W.2d 910 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Frank-Bretwisch v. Ryan 741 N.W.2d 910 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
of Comm’rs, -76 (Minn.2000); -27 (Minn.App.1986), review denied (Minn. Nov.
C & M Real Estate Services, Inc. v. Thondikulam 739 N.W.2d 725 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
C & M Real Estate Services, Inc. v. Thondikulam 739 N.W.2d 725 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Eagle Lake of Becker County Lake Ass'n v. Becker County Board of Commissioners 738 N.W.2d 788 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Eagle Lake of Becker County Lake Ass'n v. Becker County Board of Commissioners 738 N.W.2d 788 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
In Re Block 727 N.W.2d 166 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
In Re Block 727 N.W.2d 166 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
of Commrs., , 574 & n. 5 (Minn.2000)
Marriage of Goldman v. Greenwood 725 N.W.2d 747 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Marriage of Goldman v. Greenwood 725 N.W.2d 747 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
” -76 (Minn.2000) (noting that exceptions to this general rule exist when “rights affected by the amended law were vested before the change in the law” or application of changed law would produce manifest injustice or conflict with statutory direction or legislative history).
Bartheld v. County of Koochiching 716 N.W.2d 406 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Bartheld v. County of Koochiching 716 N.W.2d 406 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
of Comm’rs, (stating that “[a]mendment of a zoning ordinance is a legislative act”).
Mendota Golf, LLP v. City of Mendota Heights 708 N.W.2d 162 Minn. 2006
Mendota Golf, LLP v. City of Mendota Heights 708 N.W.2d 162 Minn. 2006
of Comm’rs, , 574 & n. 5 (Minn.2000) (clarifying that quasi-judicial zoning decisions of a county board are reviewable by writ of certiorari based on a “narrow exception” that “exists because the legislature has not provided for judicial review of zoning decisions of county boards in the district court as it has for zoning de
Brink v. Smith Companies Construction, Inc. 703 N.W.2d 871 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Brink v. Smith Companies Construction, Inc. 703 N.W.2d 871 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
of Comm’rs, (observing that appellate courts are to apply the law in effect at the time of judgment, with the exception of "when rights affected by the amended law were vested before the change in the law”).
TIMELINE, LLC v. Williams Holdings 3, LLC 698 N.W.2d 181 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
TIMELINE, LLC v. Williams Holdings 3, LLC 698 N.W.2d 181 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
In Re ZK 695 N.W.2d 656 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
In re the Expulsion of Z.K. 695 N.W.2d 656 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
In Re ZK 695 N.W.2d 656 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
In re the Expulsion of Z.K. 695 N.W.2d 656 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Dead Lake Ass'n, Inc. v. Otter Tail County 695 N.W.2d 129 Minn. 2005
Dead Lake Ass'n, Inc. v. Otter Tail County 695 N.W.2d 129 Minn. 2005
Dougherty v. State Farm Mutual Insurance Co. 683 N.W.2d 855 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Dougherty v. State Farm Mutual Insurance Co. 683 N.W.2d 855 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
of Comm’rs, (noting that highway department planned improvements to highway and county road to eliminate drifting snow in winter).
State v. Roman Nose 667 N.W.2d 386 Minn. 2003
State v. Roman Nose 667 N.W.2d 386 Minn. 2003
of Comm’rs, (concluding that additional reasons for denial of a conditional use permit (CUP) not raised in the initial proceedings could not be used to support denial of the CUP because they were beyond the scope of remand); (concluding that the district court err
Yang v. County of Carver 660 N.W.2d 828 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Yang v. County of Carver 660 N.W.2d 828 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
of Comm’rs, (quotation omitted).
Schwardt v. County of Watonwan 656 N.W.2d 383 Minn. 2003
Schwardt v. County of Watonwan 656 N.W.2d 383 Minn. 2003
of Comm’rs, Corwine, d at 486 .
Billy Graham Evangelistic Ass'n v. City of Minneapolis 653 N.W.2d 638 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Billy Graham Evangelistic Ass'n v. City of Minneapolis 653 N.W.2d 638 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
of Comm’rs, -79 (Minn.2000); review denied (Minn. Oct.
Northern States Power Co. v. City of Mendota Heights 646 N.W.2d 919 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Northern States Power Co. v. City of Mendota Heights 646 N.W.2d 919 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
American Tower, L.P. v. City of Grant 636 N.W.2d 309 Minn. 2001
American Tower, L.P. v. City of Grant 636 N.W.2d 309 Minn. 2001
Picha v. County of McLeod 634 N.W.2d 739 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Picha v. County of McLeod 634 N.W.2d 739 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
West Circle Properties LLC v. Hall 634 N.W.2d 238 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
West Circle Properties LLC v. Hall 634 N.W.2d 238 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
CUP Foods, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis 633 N.W.2d 557 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
CUP Foods, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis 633 N.W.2d 557 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
of Comm’rs, , *566 580 (Minn.2000); Earthburners, (reviewing board “must confine its inquiry to those issues raised in [the] earlier proceedings”); White Bear Rod & (city council not required to make formal fin
City of Hibbing v. Baratto 620 N.W.2d 58 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
City of Hibbing v. Baratto 620 N.W.2d 58 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
of Comm’rs, , 574 & n. 5 (Minn.2000) (noting as well that district court review of quasi-judicial zoning actions is in accord with the “general rule” ).