Cited by

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

95 citing documents.

Turner v. IDS Financial Services, Inc. 471 N.W.2d 105 Minn. 1991
Turner v. IDS Financial Services, Inc. 471 N.W.2d 105 Minn. 1991
McGuire v. C & L Restaurant Inc.
Friedman v. Commissioner of Public Safety 455 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Friedman v. Commissioner of Public Safety 455 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
This court proceeds with great caution before declaring a statute unconstitutional, see McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc., and will do so only if the' challenging party demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that it violates a constitutional provision.
Olson v. Blaeser 458 N.W.2d 113 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Olson v. Blaeser 458 N.W.2d 113 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
See McGuire v. C & L Restaurant Inc., (recognizing limited exception to general rule that failure to raise constitutional argument in trial court constitutes waiver).
Ruzic v. Commissioner of Public Safety 455 N.W.2d 89 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Ruzic v. Commissioner of Public Safety 455 N.W.2d 89 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
See McGuire v. C & L Restaurant Inc.
Blanch v. Suburban Hennepin Regional Park District 449 N.W.2d 150 Minn. 1989
In Re Haggerty 448 N.W.2d 363 Minn. 1989
In Re Haggerty 448 N.W.2d 363 Minn. 1989
McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc.
Stubbs v. North Memorial Medical Center 448 N.W.2d 78 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Stubbs v. North Memorial Medical Center 448 N.W.2d 78 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
See McGuire v. C. & L. Restaurant, Inc., , 614 n. 11 (Minn.1984).
State v. Hamm 423 N.W.2d 379 Minn. 1988
State v. Hamm 423 N.W.2d 379 Minn. 1988
This court proceeds with great caution before declaring a statute unconstitutional, see McGuire v. C & L Restaurant Inc., and will do so only if the challenging party demonstrates beyond a reasonable doubt that it violates a constitutional provision.
Leonard v. Parrish 420 N.W.2d 629 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Leonard v. Parrish 420 N.W.2d 629 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Although the interests of justice may warrant consideration of constitutional issues for the first time on appeal in some cases, McGuire v. C & L Restaurant Inc., the issues in this case are insufficient to warrant the exercise of our discretionary authority.
State Ex Rel. Humphrey v. Ri-Mel, Inc. 417 N.W.2d 102 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State Ex Rel. Humphrey v. Ri-Mel, Inc. 417 N.W.2d 102 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc.
Nachtsheim v. Wartnick 411 N.W.2d 882 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Hofstad v. Hargest 412 N.W.2d 5 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Nachtsheim v. Wartnick 411 N.W.2d 882 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc.
Hofstad v. Hargest 412 N.W.2d 5 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
1 (1986); McGuire v. C. & L. Restaurant, Inc.
Security State Bank of Howard Lake v. Dieltz 408 N.W.2d 186 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Security State Bank of Howard Lake v. Dieltz 408 N.W.2d 186 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
McGuire v. C & L Restaurant Inc.
Conroy v. Book Automation, Inc. 398 N.W.2d 657 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Conroy v. Book Automation, Inc. 398 N.W.2d 657 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc.
Steinbrecher v. McLeod Cooperative Power Ass'n 392 N.W.2d 709 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Steinbrecher v. McLeod Cooperative Power Ass'n 392 N.W.2d 709 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc.
In Re Estate of Turner 391 N.W.2d 767 Minn. 1986
In Re Estate of Turner 391 N.W.2d 767 Minn. 1986
E.g., McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc.
Metropolitan Rehabilitation Services, Inc. v. Westberg 386 N.W.2d 698 Minn. 1986
Metropolitan Rehabilitation Services, Inc. v. Westberg 386 N.W.2d 698 Minn. 1986
McGuire v. C & L Restaurant Inc.
O'Brien v. Mercy Hospital & Convalescent Nursing Care Section 382 N.W.2d 518 Minn. 1986
O'Brien v. Mercy Hospital & Convalescent Nursing Care Section 382 N.W.2d 518 Minn. 1986
In Glassman , as in McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc., we were precluded by the constitutional basis of our decision from holding the ruling should be applied only prospectively.
Lovgren v. Peoples Elec. Co., Inc. 380 N.W.2d 791 Minn. 1986
Lovgren v. Peoples Elec. Co., Inc. 380 N.W.2d 791 Minn. 1986
See McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, 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. One Oldsmobile Two-Door Sedan, 227 Minn. 280 , Gamble-Robinson Co. v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co., 157 Minn. 306 , 196 N.W.
Larson v. Anderson, Taunton & Walsh, Inc. 379 N.W.2d 615 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Larson v. Anderson, Taunton & Walsh, Inc. 379 N.W.2d 615 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
McGuire v. C. & L. Restaurant, Inc. (citations omitted), (citations omitted).
Reome v. Levine 379 N.W.2d 208 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Reome v. Levine 379 N.W.2d 208 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
“[I]f the constitutionality of [a statute] were at no time challenged or litigated in the trial court, appellant would generally be barred from challenging it here.” McGuire v. C & L Restaurant, Inc.
Rediske v. Minnesota Valley Breeder's Ass'n 374 N.W.2d 745 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Rediske v. Minnesota Valley Breeder's Ass'n 374 N.W.2d 745 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
1; see Barr/Nelson, Inc. v. Tonto’s, Inc., McGuire v. C. & L. Restaurant, Inc.
Marriage of Kostelnik v. Kostelnik 367 N.W.2d 665 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Marriage of Kostelnik v. Kostelnik 367 N.W.2d 665 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
The supreme court’s decision in McGuire v. C. & L. Restaurant, Inc., supports this view.