Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Prior Lake American v. Mader, 642 N.W.2d 729.

36 citing documents.

ROA Rochester, LLC, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
v. Mader , , 737 (Minn. 2002) .
Christina Berrier v. Minnesota State Patrol 9 N.W.3d 368 Minn. 2024
Christina Berrier v. Minnesota State Patrol 9 N.W.3d 368 Minn. 2024
v. Mader, (alterations in original) (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).
A19-0118 A19-0124 A20-1271 A20-1380 A20-1385 Minn. 2023
v. Mader , , 741–42 (Minn. 2002) (stressing the critical importance of the ability of the public and the courts to review government decisions).
Minn. 2022
In requesting such a limitation
In re Stephen A. Lawrence, et al., Petitioners, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
v. Mader , -39 (Minn. 2002).
In the Matter of: Walmart Inc., Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Nell Mathews, et al. Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Sheryl v. Mooers v. City of Lake City, Minnesota, Karen England, individually Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Sheryl v. Mooers v. City of Lake City, Minnesota, Karen England, individually Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Prior Lake Am., 439 (Minn. App. 2005), review denied (Minn. Jun.
In re the Guardianship of Tschumy 834 N.W.2d 764 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
In re the Guardianship of Tschumy 834 N.W.2d 764 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Rochon Corp. v. City of Saint Paul 814 N.W.2d 365 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Rochon Corp. v. City of Saint Paul 814 N.W.2d 365 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Matthews v. Eichorn Motors, Inc. 800 N.W.2d 823 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Matthews v. Eichorn Motors, Inc. 800 N.W.2d 823 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Razink v. Krutzig 746 N.W.2d 644 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Razink v. Krutzig 746 N.W.2d 644 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Gagliardi v. Ortho-Midwest, Inc. 733 N.W.2d 171 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Gagliardi v. Ortho-Midwest, Inc. 733 N.W.2d 171 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Phillips v. State 725 N.W.2d 778 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Phillips v. State 725 N.W.2d 778 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Mahoney & Hagberg v. Newgard 712 N.W.2d 215 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Mahoney & Hagberg v. Newgard 712 N.W.2d 215 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
v. Mader, -39 (Minn. 2002) (attorney-client privilege exists to encourage client to confide openly with attorney and to enable attorney to act more effectively on client’s behalf).
In Re the Estate of Kotowski 704 N.W.2d 522 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
In Re the Estate of Kotowski 704 N.W.2d 522 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
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
Brainerd Daily Dispatch v. Dehen 693 N.W.2d 435 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Brainerd Daily Dispatch v. Dehen 693 N.W.2d 435 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
in which an open-meeting violation was found.
Stringer v. Minnesota Vikings Football Club, LLC 686 N.W.2d 545 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Stringer v. Minnesota Vikings Football Club, LLC 686 N.W.2d 545 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Free Press v. County of Blue Earth 677 N.W.2d 471 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Free Press v. County of Blue Earth 677 N.W.2d 471 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
v. Mader, (allowing closure “when a public body seeks legal advice concerning litigation strategy”); see also Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co. v. Hous.
City Pages v. State 655 N.W.2d 839 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
City Pages v. State 655 N.W.2d 839 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
v. Mader, (citations omitted).

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by