nuisance claim (Minnesota) · Go Syfert
← Minnesota issues

nuisance claim in Minnesota

8 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 1984–2016 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.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
Randall v. Village of Excelsiorgreen
minn · 1960 · cited in 2 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 2003–2016
2 sentences

2016In Randall, the plaintiff attempted to bring a nuisance claim in place of the negligence claim, which was statutorily barred. 258 Minn. at 87 , 103 N.W.2d at 135 (“As much as we might wish to reach for the result plaintiff seeks, judicial restraint prevents us from doing so.

2016In Randall, the plaintiff attempted to bring a nuisance claim in place of the negligence claim, which was statutorily barred. 258 Minn. at 87 , 103 N.W.2d at 135 (“As much as we might wish to reach for the result plaintiff seeks, judicial restraint prevents us from doing so.

22
Frazier v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp.green
minn · 2012 · cited in 1 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 2015–2015
1 sentence

2015“The decision to deny a motion for a new trial rests in the discretion of the district court, and [appellate courts] will reverse that decision only for a clear abuse of that discretion.” Frazier v. Burlington N. Santa Fe Corp., 811 N.W.2d 618, 629 (Minn. 2012). 6 The Nygards argue that the district court deprived them of a fair trial.3 They maintain that the district court overlooked Minnesota Statutes section 216F.02, which they claim establishes their statutory right to maintain the wind turbine and which the district court should have reconciled with the nuisance claim.4 The Nygards also c

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (9)

CaseCitedYears
Johnson v. Paynesville Farmers Union Cooperative Oil Co. green
minn · 2012
1 sentence

2016Id. at 713 .

12016–2016
Sletten v. Ramsey County green
minn · 2004
1 sentence

2016On appeal from summary judgment, we assess whether “there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in applying the law.” Sletten, 675 N.W.2d at 299 .

12016–2016
Nathan Kariniemi v. City of Rockford green
minnctapp · 2015
2 sentences

2016Id. at 436 .

2016Kariniemi, 863 N.W.2d at 436 .

12016–2016
Juan Edward Shariss v. City of Bloomington green
minnctapp · 2014
1 sentence

2015“In an official immunity analysis, notwithstanding the difference between negligence and nuisance, the focus is on the kind of discretion which is exercised for immunity to be available....” Id. at 305 .

12015–2015
Mokovich v. Independent School District No. 22 green
minn · 1929
2 sentences

2004Dist. of Virginia, 177 Minn. 446 , 449, 225 N.W. 292 , 293 (1929) (adopting the rule of nonli-ability to a nuisance claim and noting that, with respect to the liability of counties, towns, and school districts, case law has made no distinction between nonliability for negligence and nuisance except when the tort causes injury to private property rights).

2004Dist. of Virginia, 177 Minn. 446 , 449, 225 N.W. 292 , 293 (1929) (adopting the rule of nonli-ability to a nuisance claim and noting that, with respect to the liability of counties, towns, and school districts, case law has made no distinction between nonliability for negligence and nuisance except when the tort causes injury to private property rights).

12004–2004
Gleason v. Metropolitan Council Transit Operations green
minn · 1998
2 sentences

2004Gleason, 582 N.W.2d at 219 .

2004Gleason, 582 N.W.2d at 219 .

12004–2004
Olson v. Ramsey County green
minn · 1993
2 sentences

2004Refusing to extend official immunity to Ramsey County under these facts would not deter the county’s compost workers’ performance by focusing “stifling attention on performance,” Olson, 509 N.W.2d at 372 , but would rather encourage these employees to comply with governmental permits, operating requirements, and facility design limitations, which were sufficiently certain and imperative.

2004Refusing to extend official immunity to Ramsey County under these facts would not deter the county's compost workers' performance by focusing "stifling attention on performance," Olson, 509 N.W.2d at 372 , but would rather encourage these employees to comply with governmental permits, operating requirements, and facility design limitations, which were sufficiently certain and imperative.

12004–2004
Hubbard v. United Press International, Inc. green
minn · 1983
1 sentence

1988II The Minnesota Supreme Court first recognized intentional infliction of emotional distress as an independent tort in Hubbard v. United Press International, 330 N.W.2d 428 (Minn.1983).

11988–1988
Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul green
scotus · 1963
2 sentences

1984Preemption of state law by federal statute or regulation is not favored “in the absence of persuasive reasons — either that the nature of the regulated subject matter permits no other conclusion, or that the Congress has unmistakably so ordained.” Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul, 373 U.S. 132, 142 , 83 S.Ct. 1210, 1217 , 10 L.Ed.2d 248 (1963).

1984Preemption of state law by federal statute or regulation is not favored “in the absence of persuasive reasons — either that the nature of the regulated subject matter permits no other conclusion, or that the Congress has unmistakably so ordained.” Florida Lime & Avocado Growers, Inc. v. Paul, 373 U.S. 132, 142 , 83 S.Ct. 1210, 1217 , 10 L.Ed.2d 248 (1963).

11984–1984

Statutes the citing opinions construe

MN § Minn. Stat. § 561.01 (4)

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.

Where else courts name it

TX 82 (1948–2026) CA 78 (1905–2026) CT 64 (1907–2026) GA 58 (1942–2025) MI 56 (1959–2026) WA 33 (1953–2026) OH 32 (1981–2026) NY 31 (1917–2026) IA 29 (1915–2024) WI 27 (1942–2025) MO 22 (1983–2025) MA 21 (1928–2023) MD 17 (1954–2026) IL 17 (1976–2025) IN 17 (1988–2024) VA 16 (1939–2024) KS 15 (1901–2024) TN 14 (1943–2019) NJ 13 (1953–2025) UT 11 (1940–2026) PA 11 (1945–2019) OK 10 (1996–2023) ME 9 (1951–2025) AL 9 (1912–2023) MN 8 (1984–2016) VT 7 (2008–2025) AZ 7 (2014–2025) ND 7 (1986–2020) SD 6 (1990–2025) MT 6 (1922–2015) CO 5 (2001–2025) FL 5 (1986–2025) OR 5 (1935–2014) MS 5 (1997–2021) NM 5 (1985–2026) NH 5 (2008–2025) LA 5 (1982–2010) NV 4 (1993–2021) WV 4 (1891–2018) SC 4 (1932–2015) AR 4 (1999–2026) DC 4 (1991–2025) KY 4 (1924–2020) NC 4 (2001–2019) ID 4 (1981–2020) RI 4 (1985–2019) AK 2 (2002–2010) HI 2 (2008–2019)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check