Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Citizens for a Safe Grant v. Lone Oak Sportsmen's Club, Inc., 624 N.W.2d 796.

23 citing documents.

Susan Neegard, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Trespass does not require bodily entry by the defendant and “can include throwing or placing an object upon the property of another.” Citizens for a Safe Grant v. Lone Oak Sportsmen’s Club, Inc., (quotation omitted) (recognizing that the “entry of bullets” from a shooting range “over and onto adjacent private property” may be unlawful entry and establish trespass).
Snowman Construction, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
“Appellant bears the burden of demonstrating that an improper evidentiary ruling caused prejudicial error.” Citizens for a Safe Grant v. Lone Oak Sportsmen’s Club, Inc.
Elliott Sirota, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
See Citizens for a Safe Grant v. Lone Oak Sportsmen’s Club, Inc., (holding stray bullets from a gun club were a private nuisance for neighboring landowners because the gun club was trespassing on their land).
Robert Sharot, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
“A court measures the degree of discomfort” caused by the harm “by the standards of ordinary people in relation to the area where they reside.” Citizens for a Safe Grant v. Lone Oak Sportsmen’s Club, Inc.
In re: A resolution of the North Mankato City Council in the matter of a nuisance property located … Minn. Ct. App. 2021
“For an interference with the enjoyment of life or property to constitute a nuisance, it must be material and substantial.” Citizens for a Safe Grant v. Lone Oak Sportsmen’s Club, Inc., (citing Jedneak v. Minneapolis Gen.
Docks of White Bear Lake, LLC, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
(“Private nuisance is limited to real property interests.”); Highview N. Apartments v. County of Ramsey , (noting that the nuisance statute defines nuisance in terms of a “resultant harm”); Citizens for a Safe Grant v. Lone Oak Sportsmen’s Club, Inc., (“For an interference with the enjoyment of life or property to co nstitute a nuisance, it mu st be material and substantial.”).
William O. Bradley, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
“For an interference with the enjoyment of life or property to constitute a nuisance, it must be material and substantial.” Citizens for a Safe Grant v. Lone Oak Sportsmen’s Club, Inc.
Derby Construction, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
The person challenging the admission of evidence “bears the burden of demonstrating that an improper evidentiary ruling caused pr ejudicial error.” Citizens for a Safe Grant v. Lone Oak Sportsmen’s Club, Inc.
Bethany Good, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Citizens for a Safe Grant v. Loan Oak Sportsmen’s Club, Inc.
Jeffrey A. August, Relator v. Chisago County Board of Commissioners 868 N.W.2d 741 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Jeffrey A. August, Relator v. Chisago County Board of Commissioners 868 N.W.2d 741 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
v. White Bear Rod & Gun Club, (considering noise levels in the context of establishing a prima facie MERA violation even when the MPCA had not issued a standard regulating noise for skeet shooting); Citizens for a Safe Grant v. Lone Oak Sportsmen’s Club, Inc., 12 (“But the legislature did not exempt shooting sports clubs from MERA claims, only from MPCA’s regulatory authority.”).
State of Minnesota by Lorie Afremov and Michael R. Afremov v. Anne L. Remes, Martha W. Gabbert Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota by Lorie Afremov and Michael R. Afremov v. Anne L. Remes, Martha W. Gabbert Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In Citizens for a Safe Grant v. Lone Oak Sportsmen’s Club, Inc., this court concluded that the continuing-wrong doctrine was applicable because the gun club’s conduct was “not limited to a single transgression, but must be viewed as an ongoing series of injuries to respondents’ properties.” Similarly, in Radloff, this court stated that to suspend the lim
Kristen Harne and Sheila Foster, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Kristen Harne and Sheila Foster, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Johnson v. Paynesville Farmers Union Cooperative Oil Co. 802 N.W.2d 383 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Johnson v. Paynesville Farmers Union Cooperative Oil Co. 802 N.W.2d 383 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Citizens for a Safe Grant v. Lone Oak Sportsmen’s Club, Inc.
State ex rel. Swan Lake Area Wildlife Ass'n v. Nicollet County Board of County Commissioners 799 N.W.2d 619 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
State ex rel. Swan Lake Area Wildlife Ass'n v. Nicollet County Board of County Commissioners 799 N.W.2d 619 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Interest Research Group v. White Bear Rod & Gun Club, 783 (Minn.1977) (affirming injunction prohibiting gun club from opening trap- and skeet-shooting facility); Citizens for a Safe Grant v. Lone Oak Sportsmen’s Club, Inc., -07 (Minn.App.2001) (affirming permanent injunction preventing operation of shooting range).
Williams v. National Football League 794 N.W.2d 391 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Williams v. National Football League 794 N.W.2d 391 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
The “court will not set aside a district court’s findings regarding entitlement to injunctive relief unless they are clearly erroneous.” Citizens for a Safe Grant v. Lone Oak Sportsmen’s Club, Inc., see also Minn. R. Civ.
Wendinger v. Forst Farms, Inc. 662 N.W.2d 546 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Wendinger v. Forst Farms, Inc. 662 N.W.2d 546 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
295 (1907); Citizens for a Safe Grant v. Lone Oak Sportsmen’s Club, Inc., , (Minn.App.2001).