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.
9 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 1984–2025 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Johnson v. Village of Cohassetgreen2 sentences1987Id. 1984Johnson v. Village of Cohasset, 263 Minn. 425, 436-37 , 116 N.W.2d 692, 700 (1962); Kurtz v. City of Apple Valley, 290 N.W.2d 171, 173 (Minn.1980). | 1 | 2 |
Call v. Gomezgreen1 sentence2024See Call, 535 N.W.2d at 319 ; Fugelseth, 907 N.W.2d at 255; In re Civ. | 1 | 1 |
Paul MULLER, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. UNITED STATES STEEL CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellantgreen1 sentence1991Muller v. United States Steel Corp., 509 F.2d 923, 929 (10th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 825 , 96 S.Ct. 39 , 46 L.Ed.2d 41 (1975). | 1 | 1 |
State Ex Rel. Jenson v. Civil Service Commissiongreen2 sentences1986Id. “[Wjhere the employee is afforded a fair hearing, the findings upon which a discharge is based are to be accepted by the court unless they are unsupported by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole.” State ex rel Jenson v. Civil Service Commission of the City of Minneapolis, 268 Minn. 536, 538 , 130 N.W.2d 143, 146 (1964). 1986Id. “[Wjhere the employee is afforded a fair hearing, the findings upon which a discharge is based are to be accepted by the court unless they are unsupported by substantial evidence on the record considered as a whole.” State ex rel Jenson v. Civil Service Commission of the City of Minneapolis, 268 Minn. 536, 538 , 130 N.W.2d 143, 146 (1964). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Uglumgreen2 sentences1985State v. Uglum, 175 Minn. 607, 610 , 222 N.W. 280, 281 (1928). 1985State v. Uglum, 175 Minn. 607, 610 , 222 N.W. 280, 281 (1928). | 1 | 1 |
Kurtz v. City of Apple Valleygreen1 sentence1984Johnson v. Village of Cohasset, 263 Minn. 425, 436-37 , 116 N.W.2d 692, 700 (1962); Kurtz v. City of Apple Valley, 290 N.W.2d 171, 173 (Minn.1980). | 1 | 1 |
Leininger v. City of Bloomingtongreen1 sentence1984See Leininger v. City of Bloomington, 299 N.W.2d 723 (Minn.1980). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Purdy
green
2 sentences2025This is because “[t]he expiration of [Pizarro- Rios’s] sentence operate[d] as a discharge that bar[red] further sanctions for [his] criminal conviction.” Purdy, 589 N.W.2d at 498 . 2025In other words, “[o]nce [Pizarro-Rios’s] sentence . . . expired, the [district] court no longer ha[d] jurisdiction to modify even what may be an unauthorized sentence”—i.e., the February 15, 2018 sentencing order that lacked the 21 Cf. id. at 833–34 (holding that a district court has subject-matter jurisdiction over a motion by a defendant under subdivision 9 of rule 27.03 to correct an allegedly unlawful felony sentence by reclassifying it as a gross misdemeanor—without imposing further sanctions—even after the sentence has expired). 22 mandatory ten-year conditional-release term. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Southern California Rapid Transit District v. Superior Court
green
2 sentences1996Southern California Rapid Transit District v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, 30 Cal.App.4th 713, 726 , 36 Cal.Rptr.2d 665 (Cal.App.1994). 1996Southern California Rapid Transit District v. Superior Court of Los Angeles County, 30 Cal.App.4th 713, 726 , 36 Cal.Rptr.2d 665 (Cal.App.1994). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
C. N. S. Enterprises, Inc. v. G. & G. Enterprises, Inc.
green
1 sentence1991Muller v. United States Steel Corp., 509 F.2d 923, 929 (10th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 825 , 96 S.Ct. 39 , 46 L.Ed.2d 41 (1975). | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Edmunds v. Chang
green
1 sentence1991Muller v. United States Steel Corp., 509 F.2d 923, 929 (10th Cir.1975), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 825 , 96 S.Ct. 39 , 46 L.Ed.2d 41 (1975). | 1 | 1991–1991 |
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.