Israel v. SCHNEIDER NATIONAL CARRIERS (2008)
green
· 16 citation events
across 4 courts.
Showing the 10 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Sort:
By significance ·
Most recent
yellow
In the Matter of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Special Permit No. 16868 (December 21, 2012) issue… (2015)
But see Campbell, 756 N.W.2d at 275 (refusing to void a statute for vagueness when “the danger of arbitrary enforcement is speculative and insufficient to render the statute unconstitutionally vague as applied”).
refusing to void a statute for vagueness when “the danger of arbitrary enforcement is speculative and insufficient to render the statute unconstitutionally vague as applied”
green
Eric Sorenson v. Joanne Sorenson (2023)
See Minn. Stat. § 523.21 ; State v. Campbell, 756 N.W.2d 263, 271 (Minn. App. 2008).
State v. Campbell, 756 N.W.2d 263, 268 (Minn. App. 2008) (“Constitutional challenges are questions of law, which we review de novo.”), rev. denied (Minn. Dec. 23, 2008).
“Constitutional challenges are questions of law, which we review de novo.”
green
State v. Basal (2009)
“Finally, courts should construe a statute to avoid absurd results and unjust consequences.” Id. at 278 ; see also State v. Murphy, 545 N.W.2d 909, 916 (Minn.1996) (rejecting a narrow interpretation of the terroristic threats statute that would produce absurd results); State v. Campbell, 756 N.W.2d 263, 274 (Minn.App.2008), review denied (Dec. 23, 2008) (rejecting interpretation of statute criminalizing failure to use financial resources of vulnerable adult to care for adult…
rejecting interpretation of statute criminalizing failure to use financial resources of vulnerable adult to care for adult that would create absurd result
green
Sorenson v. Sorenson (2022)
“The relationship between an attorney-in-fact and a principal under a POA is a fiduciary one.” State v. Campbell, 756 N.W.2d 263, 271 (Minn. Ct. App. 2008).
green
State of Minnesota v. Jeffrey Andrew Matiatos (2016)
State, City of Minneapolis v. Reha, 483 N.W.2d 688, 691-92 (Minn. 1992). “[S]crutiny is more demanding when a defendant challenges a statute implicating fundamental constitutionally protected activity, such as speech and assembly, versus a statute prohibiting conduct that is constitutionally within the power of the state to punish, such as blocking sidewalks or damaging property.” State v. Campbell, 756 N.W.2d 263, 269 (Minn. App. 2008), review denied (Minn. Dec. 23, 2008).
green
State v. Broten (2013)
“The void-for-vagueness doctrine requires that a legislative enactment define a criminal offense with sufficient defi niteness and certainty that ordinary people can understand what conduct is prohibited and in a manner that does not encourage arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement.” State v. Campbell, 756 N.W.2d 263, 269 (Minn.App.2008) (quotations omitted), review denied (Minn. Dec. 23, 2008). “[Vlagueness challenges that do not involve First Amendment freedoms must be e…
green
State v. Harlin (2009)
However, “this court will not invoke principles of lenity when the statute at issue is not ambiguous.” State v. Campbell, 756 N.W.2d 263, 275 (Minn.App.2008), review denied (Minn. Dec. 23, 2008).
green
People v. Perez-Rodriguez (2017)
See State v. Campbell, 756 N.W.2d 263, 270-72 (Minn. Ct. App. 2008) (upholding breach of fiduciary obligation where statute was admittedly broad and a factual determination based on numerous factors was necessary, noting that “[a]lthough the determination requires a judgment call, it is not so inherently elusive that it is not reasonably ascertainable or that it cannot be established beyond a reasonable doubt”).
green
In re Disciplinary Action Against Fett (2010)
See State v. Campbell, 756 N.W.2d 263, 267 (Minn.App.2008), rev. denied (Minn. Dec. 23, 2008).