Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Owens Ex Rel. Owens v. Water Gremlin Co., 605 N.W.2d 733.

35 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Kevin Herman Larson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Kevin Herman Larson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Marriage of Passolt v. Passolt 804 N.W.2d 18 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Marriage of Passolt v. Passolt 804 N.W.2d 18 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
In that situation, “further construction is neither necessary nor permitted.”
Troyer v. Vertlu Management Co./Kok & Lundberg Funeral Homes 806 N.W.2d 17 Minn. 2011
Troyer v. Vertlu Management Co./Kok & Lundberg Funeral Homes 806 N.W.2d 17 Minn. 2011
Middle-Snake-Tamarac Rivers Watershed District v. Stengrim 784 N.W.2d 834 Minn. 2010
Middle-Snake-Tamarac Rivers Watershed District v. Stengrim 784 N.W.2d 834 Minn. 2010
“If the words of the statute are ‘clear and free from all ambiguity,’ further construction is neither necessary nor permitted.” (quoting Minn.Stat.
State v. Adickes 741 N.W.2d 904 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Adickes 741 N.W.2d 904 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
(holding that when interpreting statutes, courts “look at the language of the statute before us and where that language is clear, ...
Roemhildt v. Gresser Companies, Inc. 729 N.W.2d 289 Minn. 2007
Roemhildt v. Gresser Companies, Inc. 729 N.W.2d 289 Minn. 2007
Johanns v. Minnesota Mobile Storage, Inc. 720 N.W.2d 5 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Johanns v. Minnesota Mobile Storage, Inc. 720 N.W.2d 5 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
“If the words of the statute are ‘clear and free from all ambiguity,’ further construction is neither necessary nor permitted.” (citation omitted).
Weston v. McWilliams & Associates, Inc. 716 N.W.2d 634 Minn. 2006
Weston v. McWilliams & Associates, Inc. 716 N.W.2d 634 Minn. 2006
(“[I]f the words of the statute are ‘clear and free from all ambiguity,’ further construction is neither necessary nor permitted” (quoting Minn.Stat.
BCBSM, Inc. v. Minnesota Comprehensive Health Ass'n 713 N.W.2d 41 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
BCBSM, Inc. v. Minnesota Comprehensive Health Ass'n 713 N.W.2d 41 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
“If the words of the statute are ‘clear and free from all ambiguity,’ further construction is neither necessary nor permitted.” (quotation omitted); see Minn.Stat.
Carrillo v. Fabian 701 N.W.2d 763 Minn. 2005
Olmanson v. LeSueur County 693 N.W.2d 876 Minn. 2005
Olmanson v. LeSueur County 693 N.W.2d 876 Minn. 2005
Sundby v. City of St. Peter 693 N.W.2d 206 Minn. 2005
Sundby v. City of St. Peter 693 N.W.2d 206 Minn. 2005
Molloy v. Meier 679 N.W.2d 711 Minn. 2004
Molloy v. Meier 679 N.W.2d 711 Minn. 2004
However, “[i]f the words of the statute are ‘clear and free from all ambiguity,’ further construction is neither necessary nor permitted.”
Correa v. Waymouth Farms, Inc. 664 N.W.2d 324 Minn. 2003
Correa v. Waymouth Farms, Inc. 664 N.W.2d 324 Minn. 2003
Busch v. Advanced Maintenance 659 N.W.2d 772 Minn. 2003
Busch v. Advanced Maintenance 659 N.W.2d 772 Minn. 2003
Hale v. Viking Trucking Co. 654 N.W.2d 119 Minn. 2002
Hale v. Viking Trucking Co. 654 N.W.2d 119 Minn. 2002
Marriage of Branch v. Branch 632 N.W.2d 261 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Marriage of Branch v. Branch 632 N.W.2d 261 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Amco Insurance Co. v. Independent School District 622 627 N.W.2d 683 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Amco Insurance Co. v. Independent School District 622 627 N.W.2d 683 Minn. Ct. App. 2001