Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Associated Builders & Contractors v. Ventura, 610 N.W.2d 293.

93 citing documents.

UnitedHealth Group Incorporated, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
FACTS On the final day of Minnesota’s 2024 legislative session, the legislature passed a combined omnibus bill (the bill).1 The resulting law (the Law) fills an entire session-law 1 “A bill is proposed legislation that has not completely made its way through the legislative process.” Associated Builders & Contractors v. Ventura , (Anderson, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part ).
Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
1 (Supp. 2023) , and extends the definition of the term “trigger activator” to include “a device that allows a firearm to shoot 1 “A bill is proposed legislation that has not completely made its way through the legislative process.” Associated Builders & Contractors v. Ventura , (Anderson, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part ).
Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Builders & - 99 (Minn. 2000).
Jodi D. Campbell, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Builders & -99 (Minn. 2000).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“The challenger of the constitutional validity of a statute must meet the very heavy burden of demonstrating beyond a reasonable doubt that the statute is unconstitutional.” Associated Builders &
Sokkhan Ka, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“The headnotes printed in boldface type before sections and subdivisions in editions of Minnesota Statutes are mere catchwords to indicate the contents of the section or subdivision and are not part of the statute.” Minn. Stat. § 645.49 (2018); see Associated Builders & n.23 (Minn. 2000) (stating that “revisor’s headnotes are not part of [a] statute and thus do not determine its scope or meaning”).
Shonwta D. Jackson, Minn. 2019
.” Associated Builders & Contractors v. Ventura , –99 (Minn. 2000).
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Christopher Raymond Coker. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
LTI 9500, LLC, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
D E C I S I O N “In an appeal from a summary judgment where there is n o dispute of material fact [an appellate court’s] review is limited to determining whether the lower court erred in its application of the law.” Associated Builders & 298 (Minn. 2000 ).
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Thomas Ladon Webber. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Builders & Contractors v. Ventura
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Charles Richard Stone. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In the Matter of a Petition for Decertification of an Exclusive Representative Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Builders & -99 (Minn. 2000)).
Otto v. Wright Cnty. 910 N.W.2d 446 Minn. 2018
Otto v. Wright Cnty. 910 N.W.2d 446 Minn. 2018
Associated Builders & Contractors v. Ventura , , 298-99 (Minn. 2000).
Nationwide Housing Corporation, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
See Minn. Stat. § 645.49 (2016) (“The headnotes printed in boldface type before sections and subdivisions in editions of Minnesota Statutes are mere catchwords to indicate the contents of the section or subdivision and are not part of the statute.”); see also Associated Builders & Contractors v. Ventura , 10 n.23 (Minn. 2000).
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Jerome M. Kraskey Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
legisla ture has expressly instructed the courts to disregard the captions of statutes: “The headnotes printed in boldface type before sections and subdivisions in editions of Minnesota Statutes are mere catchwords to indicate the contents of the section 11 or subdiv ision and are not part of the statute.” Minn. Stat. § 645.49 (2016); see also Associated Builders & Contractors v. Ventura , n.23 (Minn. 2000) (stating that “revisor’s headnotes are not part of the statute and thus do not determine
Back v. State 902 N.W.2d 23 Minn. 2017
Back v. State 902 N.W.2d 23 Minn. 2017
(stating that we “attempt to retain as much of the original statute as possible while striking the portions that render the statute unconstitutional”); Associated Builders & -07 (Minn. 2000).
A16-2034 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Otto v. Wright County 899 N.W.2d 186 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Otto v. Wright County 899 N.W.2d 186 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Associated Builders &amp
TCI Business Capital, Inc. v. Five Star American Die Casting, LLC, Brian T. Flynn 890 N.W.2d 423 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
TCI Business Capital, Inc. v. Five Star American Die Casting, LLC, Brian T. Flynn 890 N.W.2d 423 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
e legislature has expressly instructed the courts to disregard the captions of statutes: “The head-notes printed in boldface type before sec *432 tions and subdivisions in editions of Minnesota Statutes are mere catchwords to indicate the contents of the section or subdivision and are not part of the statute.” Minn. Stat. § 645.49 (2016); see also Associated Builders & , 303 & n.23 (Minn. 2000) (stating that “revisor’s headnotes are not part of the statute and thus do not determine its s
In re the Marriage of: Carol Lee D'Costa v. Joseph Francis D'Costa Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Carol Lee D'Costa v. Joseph Francis D'Costa Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“The challenger of the constitutional 2 validity of a statute must meet the very heavy burden of demonstrating beyond a reasonable doubt that the statute is unconstitutional.” Associated Builders &
State v. Melchert-Dinkel 844 N.W.2d 13 Minn. 2014
State v. Melchert-Dinkel 844 N.W.2d 13 Minn. 2014
Associated Builders &amp
State ex rel. Commissioner of Human Services v. Buchmann 830 N.W.2d 895 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
State ex rel. Commissioner of Human Services v. Buchmann 830 N.W.2d 895 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
A court’s power to declare a *900 statute unconstitutional should be “exercised with extreme caution.” Associated Builders &amp
Wallace v. State 820 N.W.2d 843 Minn. 2012
Wallace v. State 820 N.W.2d 843 Minn. 2012
(examining the act implementing amendments to the postconviction statutes in' determining whether the legislation violated the Single Subject and Title Clause); Associated Builders & (evaluating *852 the Omnibus Tax Act in determining whether the Legislature violated the Single Subject and Title Clause).
Haugen v. Superior Development, Inc. 819 N.W.2d 715 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Haugen v. Superior Development, Inc. 819 N.W.2d 715 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Associated Builders &amp
State v. Melchert-Dinkel 816 N.W.2d 703 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Melchert-Dinkel 816 N.W.2d 703 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Kangas v. Industrial Welders & Machinists, Inc. 814 N.W.2d 97 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Kangas v. Industrial Welders & Machinists, Inc. 814 N.W.2d 97 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
§ 645.49 (2010); Associated Builders & , 303 n. 23 (Minn.2000); Minter-Weisman Co. v. Comm’r of Revenue, revieio denied (Minn. Sept.
Anderson v. Commissioner of Health 811 N.W.2d 162 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Anderson v. Commissioner of Health 811 N.W.2d 162 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Associated Builders &amp
State v. Omwega 769 N.W.2d 291 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. Omwega 769 N.W.2d 291 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
“[W]e proceed on the presumption that Minnesota statutes are constitutional and that our power to declare a statute unconstitutional should be exercised with extreme caution.” Associated Builders &amp
Townsend v. State 767 N.W.2d 11 Minn. 2009
Townsend v. State 767 N.W.2d 11 Minn. 2009
See The Debates and Proceedings of the Minnesota Constitutional Convention 124, 262-63 (Francis H. Smith, reporter 1857); Associated Builders &amp
Murphy v. COMMISSIONER OF HUMAN SERVICES 765 N.W.2d 100 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Murphy v. COMMISSIONER OF HUMAN SERVICES 765 N.W.2d 100 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
We presume that the statute is constitutional and exercise our power to declare the stat *104 ute unconstitutional “with extreme caution.” Associated Builders &amp
State v. Netland 762 N.W.2d 202 Minn. 2009
State v. Netland 762 N.W.2d 202 Minn. 2009
We presume that “Minnesota statutes are constitutional,” and have said “that our power to declare a statute unconstitutional should be exercised with extreme caution.” Associated Builders &amp
Mertins v. Commissioner of Natural Resources 755 N.W.2d 329 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Mertins v. Commissioner of Natural Resources 755 N.W.2d 329 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
“[W]e proceed on the presumption that Minnesota statutes are constitutional and that our power to declare a statute unconstitutional should be exercised with extreme caution.” Associated Builders &amp