Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite McGuire v. C & L RESTAURANT INC., 346 N.W.2d 605.

95 citing documents.

Vyacheslav Eugeniy Bondarenko, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: T. M. A. and M. J. R., Parents Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: T. M. A. and M. J. R., Parents Minn. Ct. App. 2024
(citing McGuire v. C & L Rest., Inc., ).
Dr. Eric Steffen, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
McGuire v. C & L Rest., Inc.
Tyler Lee Johnson v. Commissioner of Public Safety 887 N.W.2d 281 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Tyler Lee Johnson v. Commissioner of Public Safety 887 N.W.2d 281 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
We next address the commissioner’s argument regarding application of the principle that “if [a] court finds a statute unconstitutional, the statute is not a law; it is just as inoperative as had it never been enacted.” McGuire v. C & L Rest., Inc.
In the Matter of the Civil COMMITMENT OF Kenneth Donald HAND 878 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In the Matter of the Civil COMMITMENT OF Kenneth Donald HAND 878 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Inc., (“[I]f the court finds a statute unconstitutional, the statute is not a law; it is just as inoperative as had it never been enacted.”).
State v. Cox 798 N.W.2d 517 Minn. 2011
Bjerke v. Johnson 727 N.W.2d 183 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Bjerke v. Johnson 727 N.W.2d 183 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc.
State v. Kolla 672 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Kolla 672 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Although this court can strike severable provisions as unconstitutional, it “cannot add language to a statute in order to render it constitutionally permissible.” McGuire v. C & L Restaurant Inc.
Minnesota Automatic Merchandising Council v. Smith 667 N.W.2d 159 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Minnesota Automatic Merchandising Council v. Smith 667 N.W.2d 159 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
McGuire v. C & L Rest., Inc., Northern States Power Co. v. Esperson, 274 Minn. 451, 457
Chapman v. Commissioner of Revenue 651 N.W.2d 825 Minn. 2002
Chapman v. Commissioner of Revenue 651 N.W.2d 825 Minn. 2002
While we can strike a severable statutory provision if found to be unconstitutional and void, “we cannot add language to a statute in order to render it constitutionally permissible.” McGuire v. C & L Restaurant Inc.
Heidbreder v. Carton 636 N.W.2d 833 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Heidbreder v. Carton 636 N.W.2d 833 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
This court “proceeds with extreme caution before declaring a statute unconstitutional.” McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc.
State v. Neely 604 N.W.2d 120 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
State v. Neely 604 N.W.2d 120 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
(quoting McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc., ).
Marriage of Holmberg v. Holmberg 588 N.W.2d 720 Minn. 1999
Marriage of Holmberg v. Holmberg 588 N.W.2d 720 Minn. 1999
McGuire v. C & L Restaurant Inc., (new rule of law applied to parties before court as well as claims arising after date of decision).
Lefto v. Hoggsbreath Enterprises, Inc. 581 N.W.2d 855 Minn. 1998
Lefto v. Hoggsbreath Enterprises, Inc. 581 N.W.2d 855 Minn. 1998
See McGuire v. C & L Restaurant Inc., (motorcyclist injured by drunk driver brought suit under the Civil Damage Act); Englund v. MN CA Partners/MN Joint Ventures, dfb/a Radisson Hotel South, aff'd (motorcyclist injured by drunk driver brought suit under Civil Damage Act).
State v. Mullen 577 N.W.2d 505 Minn. 1998
State v. Mullen 577 N.W.2d 505 Minn. 1998
The general rule when the court overrules a rule of law is that “the new rule is applied to the case before the court and to claims arising after the date of the overruling decision,” but when the court finds a statute unconstitutional, “the statute is not a law; it is just as inoperative as had it never been enacted.” McGuire v. C & L Restaurant Inc.
Costilla v. State 571 N.W.2d 587 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Costilla v. State 571 N.W.2d 587 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
See McGuire v. C & L Restaurant Inc., , 614 n. 11 (Minn.1984) (in interests of judicial efficiency, reviewing court may consider issue not properly before it to resolve all controversies between parties at same time).
State v. Loewen 565 N.W.2d 714 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
State v. Loewen 565 N.W.2d 714 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
29, 30 (1925); review denied (Minn. June 26, 1987); see McGuire v. C & L Restaurant Inc., (if a court determines that a statute is unconstitutional, “the statute is not a law; it is just as inoperative as had it never been enacted”).
State v. Willis 559 N.W.2d 693 Minn. 1997
State v. Willis 559 N.W.2d 693 Minn. 1997
McGuire v. C & L Restaurant Inc., (citations omitted); Minn.R.Evid.
Johnson v. Multiple Miscellaneous Items Numbered 1-424 523 N.W.2d 238 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Johnson v. Multiple Miscellaneous Items Numbered 1-424 523 N.W.2d 238 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc.
ESTATE OF JONES BY BLUME v. Kvamme 510 N.W.2d 6 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
ESTATE OF JONES BY BLUME v. Kvamme 510 N.W.2d 6 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc., Evenson v. City of St.
Rasivong v. Lakewood Community College 504 N.W.2d 778 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Rasivong v. Lakewood Community College 504 N.W.2d 778 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Cf. McGuire v. C & L Restaurant Inc., (although constitutional challenges to statutes generally may not be raised for first time on appeal, supreme court would make an exception where issue was implicitly raised below and briefed on appeal).
In Re Blodgett 490 N.W.2d 638 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
In Re Blodgett 490 N.W.2d 638 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc.
Mitchell v. Steffen 487 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Mitchell v. Steffen 487 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc.
Midwest Family Mutual Insurance v. Bleick 486 N.W.2d 435 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Midwest Family Mutual Insurance v. Bleick 486 N.W.2d 435 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc.
Amdahl v. Stonewall Insurance Co. 484 N.W.2d 811 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Amdahl v. Stonewall Insurance Co. 484 N.W.2d 811 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
McGuire v. C & L Restaurant
Medill v. State 477 N.W.2d 703 Minn. 1991
Medill v. State 477 N.W.2d 703 Minn. 1991
(citing McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc., ).
State v. Davidson 471 N.W.2d 691 Minn. Ct. App. 1991