Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Annandale Advocate v. City of Annandale, 435 N.W.2d 24.

70 citing documents.

In the Matter of the Application of Michael Schuster and Lonny Witkofsky for a Conditional Use Permit Minn. Ct. App. 2026
This is because “standing is essential to a court’s exercise of jurisdiction.” In re Block , (footnote omitted) ().
Sela Investments, Ltd LLP v. J.H. Minn. 2026
Even when a party has not raised the issue, we can question a party’s standing on our own motion.” (citation omitted)); (“The question of standing, which can be raised by this court on its own motion, is essential to 10 our exercise of jurisdiction.”); see also, –75, 174 n.3 (Minn. App. 2007) (addressing a party’s standing after requ
In Re: The Paternity of a Female child, born June 26, 2024 Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Minnesota Teamsters Service Bureau v. GoodRx, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Minnesota Teamsters Service Bureau v. GoodRx, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2025
v. City of Annandale, ).
Midland Funding LLC, et al v. Joy Ford Minn. Ct. App. 2020
James Linn, et al v. BCBSM, Inc. 890 N.W.2d 160 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
James Linn, et al v. BCBSM, Inc. 890 N.W.2d 160 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(stating that the “legislature knew how to incorporate a specific reference to cities and other local government bodies in the Open Meeting Law .
KSTP-TV v. Metropolitan Council 884 N.W.2d 342 Minn. 2016
KSTP-TV v. Metropolitan Council 884 N.W.2d 342 Minn. 2016
Robert Burks v. The Metropolitan Council Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Robert Burks v. The Metropolitan Council Minn. Ct. App. 2015
to argue that “the status of government data may change [from public to private] depending on specific purposes and circumstances.” But Annandale Advocate is distinguishable on its facts: it concerned a newspaper’s effort to obtain an investigative report of a police chief’s alleged misconduct and inc
Save Mille Lacs Sportsfishing, Inc. v. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 859 N.W.2d 845 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation v. Renee C. Kinzer, John Doe, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation v. Renee C. Kinzer, John Doe, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Charles F. Bond v. American Select Insurance Management Corporation, a Florida corporation, et al., Timothy J. Pawlik, et … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Charles F. Bond v. American Select Insurance Management Corporation, a Florida corporation, et al., Timothy J. Pawlik, et … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(stating that “[t]he question of standing .
Sheryl V. Mooers v. City of Lake City, Minnesota, et al., Karen England, individually Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Sheryl V. Mooers v. City of Lake City, Minnesota, et al., Karen England, individually Minn. Ct. App. 2014
League of Women Voters Minnesota v. Ritchie 819 N.W.2d 636 Minn. 2012
League of Women Voters Minnesota v. Ritchie 819 N.W.2d 636 Minn. 2012
Because standing is essential to our exercise of jurisdiction, the issue is one "which can be raised by this court on its own motion,” and we therefore will decide whether petitioners have standing, even though the issue was raised only by Minnesota Majority.
Richards v. Reiter 796 N.W.2d 509 Minn. 2011
Richards v. Reiter 796 N.W.2d 509 Minn. 2011
Metro Building Companies v. RAM Buildings, Inc. 783 N.W.2d 204 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Metro Building Companies v. RAM Buildings, Inc. 783 N.W.2d 204 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
(“The question of standing ...
State v. Perez 779 N.W.2d 105 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. Perez 779 N.W.2d 105 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
§ 609.349 (2008) (creating exception to some criminal-sexual-conduct offenses if complainant is actor’s legal spouse and couple is not in process of separation or divorce); cf. Annandale *111 (stating that “legislature knew how to incorporate a specific reference to cities and other local government bodies in the Open Meeting Law ...
Frieler v. Carlson Marketing Group, Inc. 751 N.W.2d 558 Minn. 2008
Enright v. Lehmann 735 N.W.2d 326 Minn. 2007
Enright v. Lehmann 735 N.W.2d 326 Minn. 2007
In Re Block 727 N.W.2d 166 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
In Re Block 727 N.W.2d 166 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Hanson v. Woolston 701 N.W.2d 257 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Hanson v. Woolston 701 N.W.2d 257 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
City of Duluth v. Duluth Police Local 690 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
City of Duluth v. Duluth Police Local 690 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Gale v. Rittenhouse 686 N.W.2d 50 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Gale v. Rittenhouse 686 N.W.2d 50 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
“[A] party whose legitimate interest is ‘injured in fact’ has standing unless the legislature has indicated that the interest asserted is not to be protected.” (quoting Snyder’s Drug Stores, Inc. v. Minn. State Bd.
Citizens for a Balanced City v. Plymouth Congregational Church 672 N.W.2d 13 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Citizens for a Balanced City v. Plymouth Congregational Church 672 N.W.2d 13 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Annandale Advocate v. City of Annandale , (stating standing is essential to court’s exercise of jurisdiction).
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
(holding that investigative report into police chiefs conduct was protected as private personnel data).
Improvement of County Ditch No. 86, Branch 1 v. Phillips 625 N.W.2d 813 Minn. 2001
Improvement of County Ditch No. 86, Branch 1 v. Phillips 625 N.W.2d 813 Minn. 2001
Associated Builders & Contractors v. Carlson 590 N.W.2d 130 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Associated Builders & Contractors v. Carlson 590 N.W.2d 130 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Fieno v. State 567 N.W.2d 739 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Fieno v. State 567 N.W.2d 739 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Appletree Square I Ltd. Partnership v. O'Connor & Hannan 559 N.W.2d 711 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Appletree Square I Ltd. Partnership v. O'Connor & Hannan 559 N.W.2d 711 Minn. Ct. App. 1997