Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Board of County Commissioners v. Citizens' National Bank, 23 Minn. 280.

26 citing documents.

Holmes v. Borgen 273 N.W. 623 Minn. 1937
Holmes v. Borgen 273 N.W. 623 Minn. 1937
Bank, 23 Minn. 280 ; State v. St.
Bemis Bro. Bag Company v. Wallace 266 N.W. 690 Minn. 1936
Bemis Bro. Bag Company v. Wallace 266 N.W. 690 Minn. 1936
Bank, 23 Minn. 280, 281-282 , said: “The general policy of the law is to avoid duplicate taxation.
City of Minneapolis v. Armson 246 N.W. 660 Minn. 1933
City of Minneapolis v. Armson 246 N.W. 660 Minn. 1933
State ex rel. Goetzman v. Minnesota Tax Commission 161 N.W. 516 Minn. 1917
State ex rel. Goetzman v. Minnesota Tax Commission 161 N.W. 516 Minn. 1917
Bank of Faribault, 23 Minn. 280 .
State v. Royal Mineral Ass'n 156 N.W. 128 Minn. 1916
State v. Royal Mineral Ass'n 156 N.W. 128 Minn. 1916
of Rice County v. Citizens’ National Bank of Faribault, 23 Minn. 280 .
State v. Northern Pacific Railway Co. 153 N.W. 850 Minn. 1915
State v. Northern Pacific Railway Co. 153 N.W. 850 Minn. 1915
Bank, 23 Minn. 280 ; Farrington v. Tennessee, 95 U. S. 679 , 24 L. ed. 558.
State v. McPhail 145 N.W. 108 Minn. 1914
State v. McPhail 145 N.W. 108 Minn. 1914
Bank of Faribault, 23 Minn. 280, 286 ; State v. Jones, 24 Minn. 251 ; County of Olmsted v. Barber, 31 Minn. 256 , ; In re Jefferson, 35 Minn. 215, 219 , ; State v. Stearns, 72 Minn. 200, 222 , .
Love v. Town of Preston 128 N.W. 673 Minn. 1910
Love v. Town of Preston 128 N.W. 673 Minn. 1910
Board of County Commissioners of Rice County v. Citizens National Bank of Faribault, 23 Minn. 280 .
State v. Twin City Telephone Co. 116 N.W. 835 Minn. 1908
State v. Twin City Telephone Co. 116 N.W. 835 Minn. 1908
Bank of Faribault, 23 Minn. 280 .
State ex rel. Marr v. Stearns 75 N.W. 210 Minn. 1898
State ex rel. Marr v. Stearns 75 N.W. 210 Minn. 1898
As was said by this court in the case of Board of Commissioners of Bice County v. Citizens’ National Bank, 23 Minn. 280, 287 .
State v. St. Paul Union Depot Co. 43 N.W. 840 Minn. 1889
State v. St. Paul Union Depot Co. 43 N.W. 840 Minn. 1889
Bank, 23 Minn. 280 ; Farrington v. Tennessee, 95 U. S. 679 .
State v. Rand 40 N.W. 835 Minn. 1888
State v. Rand 40 N.W. 835 Minn. 1888
County of Hennepin v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co. 24 N.W. 196 Minn. 1885
County of Hennepin v. St. Paul, Minneapolis & Manitoba Railway Co. 24 N.W. 196 Minn. 1885
Bank, 23 Minn. 280 , 282: “A construction leading to any such result should be avoided, unless the cogency of some express provision or unavoidable implication of the statute compels its adoption.” We are clear that there is no such “cogency” in this instance.