Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
16 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 1901–2023 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Minnesota courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Koppigreen1 sentence2015See Koppi, 798 N.W.2d at 361 . | 1 | 1 |
Bio-Medical Laboratories, Inc. v. Trainorgreen2 sentences2003See, e.g., City of Miami Beach v. Perell, 52 So.2d 906, 907 (Fla.1951) (holding that exhaustion of ad ministrative remedies is not required before proceeding to court to make a “general attack on the validity of the ordinance”); Bio-Medical Lab., Inc. v. Trainor, 68 Ill.2d 540 , 12 Ill.Dec. 600 , 370 N.E.2d 223, 227 (1977) (stating that exhaustion is not required when an administrative rule asserting administrative authority is challenged on its face as not authorized by the enabling legislation); Billis v. City of Toledo, 63 Ohio App.2d 188 , 410 N.E.2d 767, 768 (1977) (stating that an action 2003See, e.g., City of Miami Beach v. Perell, 52 So.2d 906, 907 (Fla.1951) (holding that exhaustion of ad ministrative remedies is not required before proceeding to court to make a “general attack on the validity of the ordinance”); Bio-Medical Lab., Inc. v. Trainor, 68 Ill.2d 540 , 12 Ill.Dec. 600 , 370 N.E.2d 223, 227 (1977) (stating that exhaustion is not required when an administrative rule asserting administrative authority is challenged on its face as not authorized by the enabling legislation); Billis v. City of Toledo, 63 Ohio App.2d 188 , 410 N.E.2d 767, 768 (1977) (stating that an action | 1 | 1 |
City of Miami Beach v. Perellgreen2 sentences2003See, e.g., City of Miami Beach v. Perell, 52 So.2d 906, 907 (Fla.1951) (holding that exhaustion of administrative *387 remedies is not required before proceeding to court to make a "general attack on the validity of the ordinance"); Bio-Medical Lab., Inc. v. Trainor, 68 Ill.2d 540 , 12 Ill.Dec. 600 , 370 N.E.2d 223, 227 (1977) (stating that exhaustion is not required when an administrative rule asserting administrative authority is challenged on its face as not authorized by the enabling legislation); Billis v. City of Toledo, 63 Ohio App.2d 188 , 410 N.E.2d 767, 768 (1977) (stating that an ac 2003See, e.g., City of Miami Beach v. Perell, 52 So.2d 906, 907 (Fla.1951) (holding that exhaustion of ad ministrative remedies is not required before proceeding to court to make a “general attack on the validity of the ordinance”); Bio-Medical Lab., Inc. v. Trainor, 68 Ill.2d 540 , 12 Ill.Dec. 600 , 370 N.E.2d 223, 227 (1977) (stating that exhaustion is not required when an administrative rule asserting administrative authority is challenged on its face as not authorized by the enabling legislation); Billis v. City of Toledo, 63 Ohio App.2d 188 , 410 N.E.2d 767, 768 (1977) (stating that an action | 1 | 1 |
Garcia-Marroquin v. Nueces County Bail Bond Boardgreen2 sentences2003See, e.g., City of Miami Beach v. Perell, 52 So.2d 906, 907 (Fla.1951) (holding that exhaustion of administrative *387 remedies is not required before proceeding to court to make a "general attack on the validity of the ordinance"); Bio-Medical Lab., Inc. v. Trainor, 68 Ill.2d 540 , 12 Ill.Dec. 600 , 370 N.E.2d 223, 227 (1977) (stating that exhaustion is not required when an administrative rule asserting administrative authority is challenged on its face as not authorized by the enabling legislation); Billis v. City of Toledo, 63 Ohio App.2d 188 , 410 N.E.2d 767, 768 (1977) (stating that an ac 2003See, e.g., City of Miami Beach v. Perell, 52 So.2d 906, 907 (Fla.1951) (holding that exhaustion of ad ministrative remedies is not required before proceeding to court to make a “general attack on the validity of the ordinance”); Bio-Medical Lab., Inc. v. Trainor, 68 Ill.2d 540 , 12 Ill.Dec. 600 , 370 N.E.2d 223, 227 (1977) (stating that exhaustion is not required when an administrative rule asserting administrative authority is challenged on its face as not authorized by the enabling legislation); Billis v. City of Toledo, 63 Ohio App.2d 188 , 410 N.E.2d 767, 768 (1977) (stating that an action | 1 | 1 |
Billis v. City of Toledogreen2 sentences2003See, e.g., City of Miami Beach v. Perell, 52 So.2d 906, 907 (Fla.1951) (holding that exhaustion of ad ministrative remedies is not required before proceeding to court to make a “general attack on the validity of the ordinance”); Bio-Medical Lab., Inc. v. Trainor, 68 Ill.2d 540 , 12 Ill.Dec. 600 , 370 N.E.2d 223, 227 (1977) (stating that exhaustion is not required when an administrative rule asserting administrative authority is challenged on its face as not authorized by the enabling legislation); Billis v. City of Toledo, 63 Ohio App.2d 188 , 410 N.E.2d 767, 768 (1977) (stating that an action 2003See, e.g., City of Miami Beach v. Perell, 52 So.2d 906, 907 (Fla.1951) (holding that exhaustion of ad ministrative remedies is not required before proceeding to court to make a “general attack on the validity of the ordinance”); Bio-Medical Lab., Inc. v. Trainor, 68 Ill.2d 540 , 12 Ill.Dec. 600 , 370 N.E.2d 223, 227 (1977) (stating that exhaustion is not required when an administrative rule asserting administrative authority is challenged on its face as not authorized by the enabling legislation); Billis v. City of Toledo, 63 Ohio App.2d 188 , 410 N.E.2d 767, 768 (1977) (stating that an action | 1 | 1 |
Drum v. Minnesota Board of Water & Soil Resourcesgreen1 sentence2002“Generally, we will invalidate an agency rule only if the rule was adopted in excess of the agency’s statutory authority.” Drum v. Bd. of Water & Soil Res., 574 N.W.2d 71, 73 (Minn.App.1998). | 1 | 1 |
Matter of Eigenheergreen1 sentence1998In re Eigenheer, 453 N.W.2d 349, 354 (Minn.App.1990) (upholding Department of Natural Resources rule for public waters wetlands). | 1 | 1 |
Minnesota Chamber of Commerce v. Minnesota Pollution Control Agencygreen1 sentence1994Minnesota Chamber of Commerce v. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 469 N.W.2d 100, 103 (Minn.App.1991) (quoting G. | 1 | 1 |
Beardslee v. Iowa Department of Job Servicesgreen1 sentence1992See Beardslee v. Iowa Dep’t of Job Servs., 276 N.W.2d 373 (Iowa 1979); cf. Larson v. Christgau, 234 Minn. 561, 565 , 51 N.W.2d 63, 66 (1952) (where employer failed to timely appeal a grant of unemployment benefits to employee, employer was barred from raising the issue of employee’s right to benefits in a timely appeal from employer’s subsequent rate redetermination). | 1 | 1 |
Larson v. Christgaugreen2 sentences1992See Beardslee v. Iowa Dep’t of Job Servs., 276 N.W.2d 373 (Iowa 1979); cf. Larson v. Christgau, 234 Minn. 561, 565 , 51 N.W.2d 63, 66 (1952) (where employer failed to timely appeal a grant of unemployment benefits to employee, employer was barred from raising the issue of employee’s right to benefits in a timely appeal from employer’s subsequent rate redetermination). 1992See Beardslee v. Iowa Dep’t of Job Servs., 276 N.W.2d 373 (Iowa 1979); cf. Larson v. Christgau, 234 Minn. 561, 565 , 51 N.W.2d 63, 66 (1952) (where employer failed to timely appeal a grant of unemployment benefits to employee, employer was barred from raising the issue of employee’s right to benefits in a timely appeal from employer’s subsequent rate redetermination). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Motor Vehicle Mfrs. Assn. of United States, Inc. v. State Farm Mut. Automobile Ins. Co.
green
2 sentences2013Normally, an agency rule would be arbitrary and capricious if the agency has relied on factors which Congress has not intended it to consider, entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem, offered an explanation for its decision that runs counter to the evidence before the agency, or is so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a difference in view or the product of agency expertise. 463 U.S. 29, 43 , 103 S.Ct. 2856 , 77 L.Ed.2d 443 (1983) (citations omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted). 2013Normally, an agency rule would be arbitrary and capricious if the agency has relied on factors which Congress has not intended it to consider, entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem, offered an explanation for its decision that runs counter to the evidence before the agency, or is so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a difference in view or the product of agency expertise. 463 U.S. 29, 43 , 103 S.Ct. 2856 , 77 L.Ed.2d 443 (1983) (citations omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted). | 2 | 1989–2013 |
Independent Sch. Dist. No. 581, Edgerton v. Mattheis
green
2 sentences1977"Contested case" is defined by Minn.St. 15.0411, subd. 4: "`Contested case' means a proceeding before an agency in which the legal rights, duties, or privileges of specific parties are required by law or constitutional right to be determined after an agency hearing. * * *" This court applied the above definition to a school district in Independent School District No. 581 v. Mattheis, 275 Minn. 383 , 147 N.W.2d 374 (1966). 1977"Contested case" is defined by Minn.St. 15.0411, subd. 4: "`Contested case' means a proceeding before an agency in which the legal rights, duties, or privileges of specific parties are required by law or constitutional right to be determined after an agency hearing. * * *" This court applied the above definition to a school district in Independent School District No. 581 v. Mattheis, 275 Minn. 383 , 147 N.W.2d 374 (1966). | 2 | 1977–1977 |
State v. Youngren
green
2 sentences1977The proceedings before the commissioner of education do not, as to an affected school district, constitute a `contested case' within the meaning of § 15.0419 and for that reason the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act are not applicable." 275 Minn. 388 , 147 N.W.2d 377 . 1977“Contested case” is defined by Minn.St. 15.0411, subd. 4: “ ‘Contested case’ means a proceeding before an agency in which the legal rights, duties, or privileges of specific parties are required by law or constitutional right to be determined after an agency hearing. * * * ” This court applied the above definition to a school district in Independent School District No. 581 v. Mattheis, 275 Minn. 388 , 147 N.W.2d 374 (1966). | 2 | 1977–1977 |
Browning v. Hinkle
neutral
2 sentences1913Browning v. Hinkle, 48 Minn. 544 , 51 N. W. 605 , 31 Am. 1913Browning v. Hinkle, 48 Minn. 544 , 51 N. W. 605 , 31 Am. | 2 | 1901–1913 |
Teaching License of Falgren v. State, Board of Teaching
green
1 sentence2023The supreme court reasoned, “We agree, in the narrowest sense, the issue sought to be 5 precluded in the agency hearing is identical to the issue decided in the termination proceeding, namely, whether the nonconsensual sexual contact with I.B. took place.” Id. at 905 . | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Clapper v. Budget Oil Co.
green
1 sentence2012Id. at 726 . | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Keefe v. Cargill, Inc.
neutral
1 sentence1987Id. at 426 . | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Town of Ashwaubenon v. Public Service Commission
green
1 sentence1966Much the same question was raised in Town of Ashwaubenon v. Public Service Comm. 22 Wis. (2d) 38, 125 N. W. (2d) 647 , 126 N. W. (2d) 567 . | 1 | 1966–1966 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.