9 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 1988–2018 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Bauerly v. Bauerlygreen1 sentence2018See Bauerly v. Bauerly , 765 N.W.2d 108 , 110 (Minn. App. 2009) (stating court's "duty on remand is to execute the mandate of the remanding court strictly according to its terms" (quotation omitted) ). | 1 | 1 |
Grilli v. Stategreen2 sentences2003Generally, "it is the trial court's duty to insure that a remand hearing is held." Grilli v. State, 378 N.W.2d 823, 825 (Minn. App.1985). 2003Generally, “it is the trial court’s duty to insure that a remand hearing is held.” Grilli v. State, 378 N.W.2d 823, 825 (Minn.App.1985). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Waller v. Georgia
green
2 sentences1995If a remand for a hearing on whether there was a specific basis for closure might remedy the violation of closing the trial without an adequate showing of the need for closure, then the initial remedy is a remand, not a retrial. 494 N.W.2d at 260 (citing Waller, 467 U.S. at 49 , 104 S.Ct. at 2217 ). 1995If a remand for a hearing on whether there was a specific basis for closure might remedy the violation of closing the trial without an adequate showing of the need for closure, then the initial remedy is a remand, not a retrial. 494 N.W.2d at 260 (citing Waller, 467 U.S. at 49 , 104 S.Ct. at 2217 ). | 2 | 1992–1995 |
Marriage of Duffey v. Duffey
green
1 sentence2015But when the remand instruction is not specific, the district court has discretion “to proceed in any manner not inconsistent with the remand order.” Id. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Licari
green
1 sentence2012We also ordered a remand for further proceedings rather than a new trial in State v. Licari, 659 N.W.2d 243 (Minn.2003). | 1 | 2012–2012 |
State v. McRae
green
2 sentences1995If a remand for a hearing on whether there was a specific basis for closure might remedy the violation of closing the trial without an adequate showing of the need for closure, then the initial remedy is a remand, not a retrial. 494 N.W.2d at 260 (citing Waller, 467 U.S. at 49 , 104 S.Ct. at 2217 ). 1995If a remand for a hearing on whether there was a specific basis for closure might remedy the violation of closing the trial without an adequate showing of the need for closure, then the initial remedy is a remand, not a retrial. 494 N.W.2d at 260 (citing Waller, 467 U.S. at 49 , 104 S.Ct. at 2217 ). | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Hoagland v. State
green
1 sentence1995Hoagland, a new trial after a remand hearing pursuant to Hoagland v. State, 518 N.W.2d 531 (Minn. 1994) be, and the same is, affirmed. | 1 | 1995–1995 |
Brandhorst v. Special School District No. 1
green
1 sentence1991Brandhorst advances as an alternative base for mandamus that the school district failed to follow the remand instruction of the supreme court that it must “ascertain the precise facts and * * * implement any reasonable realignment that will assure a position for a more senior industrial arts teacher.” Brandhorst, 392 N.W.2d at 889 . | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Marriage of Sefkow v. Sefkow
green
1 sentence1988Rather, it echoed the earlier determination of the Sefkow I court when it found that the trial court had arbitrarily disregarded all evidence reflecting negatively on Robert and all evidence in favor of Paula, despite the extensive findings available after the remand hearing. 413 N.W.2d at 134 . | 1 | 1988–1988 |
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.