Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Amaral v. Saint Cloud Hospital, 598 N.W.2d 379.

308 citing documents.

Garde v. One 1992 Ford Explorer XLT Motor Vehicle, Vin No. 1FMDU34X3NUC11624 662 N.W.2d 165 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Wukawitz 662 N.W.2d 517 Minn. 2003
State v. Wukawitz 662 N.W.2d 517 Minn. 2003
Kastner v. Star Trails Ass'n 658 N.W.2d 890 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Kastner v. Star Trails Ass'n 658 N.W.2d 890 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
In Re Estate of Palmer 658 N.W.2d 197 Minn. 2003
In Re Estate of Palmer 658 N.W.2d 197 Minn. 2003
State v. Larivee 656 N.W.2d 226 Minn. 2003
State v. Larivee 656 N.W.2d 226 Minn. 2003
“A statute should be interpreted, whenever possible, to give effect to all of its provisions, and ‘no word, phrase, or sentence should be deemed superfluous, void, or insignificant.’ ” ().
HealthPartners, Inc. v. Bernstein 655 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
HealthPartners, Inc. v. Bernstein 655 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Wolfer v. Microboards Manufacturing, LLC 654 N.W.2d 360 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Wolfer v. Microboards Manufacturing, LLC 654 N.W.2d 360 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
*364 A statute should be interpreted, whenever possible, to give effect to all of its provisions, and “no word, phrase, or sentence should be deemed superfluous, void, or insignificant.”
Swenson v. Waseca Mutual Insurance Co. 653 N.W.2d 794 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Swenson v. Waseca Mutual Insurance Co. 653 N.W.2d 794 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Stern 653 N.W.2d 222 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Stern 653 N.W.2d 222 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Minnesota Equal Access Network Services v. Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railroad 646 N.W.2d 911 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Means v. BURLINGTON NO. & SANTA FE R. CO. 646 N.W.2d 911 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Means v. BURLINGTON NO. & SANTA FE R. CO. 646 N.W.2d 911 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Minnesota Equal Access Network Services v. Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railroad 646 N.W.2d 911 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
A statute should be interpreted, whenever possible, to give effect to all of its provisions, and “no word, phrase, or sentence should be deemed superfluous, void, or insignificant.”
Gomon v. Northland Family Physicians, Ltd. 645 N.W.2d 413 Minn. 2002
Gomon v. Northland Family Physicians, Ltd. 645 N.W.2d 413 Minn. 2002
Occhino v. Grover 640 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Occhino v. Grover 640 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Cloud Hosp., (rules of grammar apply to determine meaning); Glen Paul Court Neighborhood Ass’n v. Paster, (sections of the statute must be read together to give words their plain meaning); see also William N. Eskridge, Jr. & *360 Philip P. Frickey, Foreword: Law as Equilibrium, 10
American Tower, L.P. v. City of Grant 636 N.W.2d 309 Minn. 2001
American Tower, L.P. v. City of Grant 636 N.W.2d 309 Minn. 2001
Progressive Specialty Insurance Co. v. Widness Ex Rel. Widness 635 N.W.2d 516 Minn. 2001
Walser Auto Sales, Inc. v. City of Richfield 635 N.W.2d 391 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Walser Auto Sales, Inc. v. City of Richfield 635 N.W.2d 391 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
State v. Gebeck 635 N.W.2d 385 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
State v. Gebeck 635 N.W.2d 385 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Mellett v. Fairview Health Services 634 N.W.2d 421 Minn. 2001
Mellett v. Fairview Health Services 634 N.W.2d 421 Minn. 2001
Nelson v. American Family Insurance Group 632 N.W.2d 264 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Piche v. Independent School District No. 621 634 N.W.2d 193 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Nelson v. American Family Insurance Group 632 N.W.2d 264 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
A statute should be interpreted, whenever possible, to give effect to all of its provisions; “no word, phrase, or sentence should be deemed superfluous, void, or insignificant.” (citing Owens v. Federated Mut.
Piche v. Independent School District No. 621 634 N.W.2d 193 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Engvall v. Soo Line Railroad Co. 632 N.W.2d 560 Minn. 2001
Engvall v. Soo Line Railroad Co. 632 N.W.2d 560 Minn. 2001
Astleford Equipment Co. v. Navistar International Transportation Corp. 632 N.W.2d 182 Minn. 2001
Astleford Equipment Co. v. Navistar International Transportation Corp. 632 N.W.2d 182 Minn. 2001
A statute should be interpreted, whenever possible, to give effect to all of its provisions, and “no word, phrase, or sentence should be deemed superfluous, void, or insignificant.”
Buss v. Johnson 624 N.W.2d 781 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Buss v. Johnson 624 N.W.2d 781 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Baumann v. Chaska Building Center, Inc. 621 N.W.2d 795 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Baumann v. Chaska Building Center, Inc. 621 N.W.2d 795 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
-86 (Minn.1999) (illustrating proper analysis of a statute).
American Family Insurance Group v. Schroedl 616 N.W.2d 273 Minn. 2000
American Family Insurance Group v. Schroedl 616 N.W.2d 273 Minn. 2000
Baker v. Ploetz 616 N.W.2d 263 Minn. 2000
Baker v. Ploetz 616 N.W.2d 263 Minn. 2000