Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite Annandale Advocate v. City of Annandale, 435 N.W.2d 24.
-
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., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
- James Linn v. BCBSM, Inc. 890 N.W.2d 160 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
-
James Linn 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 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
- Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation v. Renee C. Kinzer, John Doe Minn. Ct. App. 2015
- Charles F. Bond v. American Select Insurance Management Corporation, a Florida corporation, Timothy J. Pawlik Minn. Ct. App. 2014
-
Charles F. Bond v. American Select Insurance Management Corporation, a Florida corporation, Timothy J. Pawlik
Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(stating that “[t]he question of standing .
- 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
- 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
- Deli v. Hasselmo 542 N.W.2d 649 Minn. Ct. App. 1996