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.
10 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 1997–2024 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 |
|---|---|---|
Rico v. Stategreen2 sentences1999The purpose of statutory immunity is “to preserve the separation of powers by insulating executive and legislative policy decisions from judicial review through tort actions.” Rico v. State, 472 N.W.2d 100, 104 (Minn.1991). 1998The purpose of statutory immunity is "to preserve the separation of powers by insulating executive and legislative policy decisions from judicial review through tort actions.” Rico v. State, 472 N.W.2d 100, 104 (Minn.1991). | 3 | 3 |
Nusbaum v. County of Blue Earthgreen2 sentences1997The purpose of statutory immunity is rooted in the separation of powers — to prevent courts from second guessing "`policy-making activities that are legislative or executive in nature.'" Watson, 553 N.W.2d at 412 (quoting Nusbaum v. Blue Earth County, 422 N.W.2d 713, 718 (Minn.1988)). 1997The purpose of statutory immunity is rooted in the separation of powers — to prevent courts from second guessing ‘“policy-making activities that are legislative or executive in nature.’ ” Watson, 553 N.W.2d at 412 (quoting Nusbaum v. Blue Earth County, 422 N.W.2d 713, 718 (Minn.1988)). | 2 | 4 |
Fisher v. County of Rockgreen1 sentence2015“The purpose of statutory immunity is to preserve the separation of powers by insulating executive and legislative policy decisions from judicial review through tort actions.” Fisher v. Cnty. of Rock, 596 N.W.2d 646, 652 (Minn. 1999) (quotation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Holmquist v. Stategreen1 sentence2015Holmquist, 425 N.W.2d at 233 (stating that the purpose of statutory immunity is to protect government actions from “judicial second-guessing”). | 1 | 1 |
Watson v. Metropolitan Transit Commissiongreen2 sentences1997It is intended to prevent courts from second-guessing “ ‘policy-making activities that are legislative or executive in nature.’ ” Watson, 553 N.W.2d at 412 (Minn.1996) (quoting Nusbaum v. Blue Earth County, 422 N.W.2d 713, 718 (Minn.1988)). 1997See Janklow v. Minnesota Bd. of Exam'rs, 552 N.W.2d 711, 716 (Minn.1996) (clarifying that state's "discretionary function" immunity, Minn.Stat. § 3.736, subd. 3, will be called "statutory" immunity); Watson v. Metropolitan Transit Comm'n, 553 N.W.2d 406, 412 (Minn.1996) (stating that municipality's "discretionary function" immunity, Minn.Stat. § 466.03, subd. 6, is known as "statutory" immunity). *478 The purpose of statutory immunity is rooted in the separation of powers. | 1 | 1 |
Janklow v. Minnesota Board of Examiners for Nursing Home Administratorsgreen1 sentence1997See Janklow v. Minnesota Bd. of Exam'rs, 552 N.W.2d 711, 716 (Minn.1996) (clarifying that state's "discretionary function" immunity, Minn.Stat. § 3.736, subd. 3, will be called "statutory" immunity); Watson v. Metropolitan Transit Comm'n, 553 N.W.2d 406, 412 (Minn.1996) (stating that municipality's "discretionary function" immunity, Minn.Stat. § 466.03, subd. 6, is known as "statutory" immunity). *478 The purpose of statutory immunity is rooted in the separation of powers. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Schroeder v. St. Louis County
green
2 sentences2024“The purpose of statutory immunity is to protect the legislative and executive branches from judicial second-guessing of certain policy-making activities through the medium of tort actions.” Schroeder, 708 N.W.2d at 503 . 2024“Statutory immunity is extended when there has been a planning-level decision; that is, social, political, or economic considerations have been evaluated and weighed as part of the decision-making process.” Id. at 504 . | 1 | 2024–2024 |
S.W. v. Spring Lake Park School District No. 16
green
1 sentence2003The underlying “purpose of statutory immunity is to protect government entities from having the judiciary second-guess the important public policy decisions they are required to make.” S.W., 580 N.W.2d at 23 . | 1 | 2003–2003 |
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.