cost defense (Minnesota) · Go Syfert
← Minnesota issues

cost defense in Minnesota

7 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 1981–2016 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
Drake v. Ryangreen
minn · 1994 · cited in 1 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 2002–2002
2 sentences

2002Id. at 789.

2002Id. at 789.

11
Ronald Julian Hanson v. Rick Passer, Chief Executive Officer, Anoka County Adult Detention Facilitygreen
ca8 · 1994 · cited in 1 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 1996–1996
1 sentence

1996Minn.R.Crim.P 5.02(5) “ ‘recognizes that one who can pay part but not all of the cost of his defense cannot be denied appointment of counsel.’ ” Id. at 895 (quoting Hanson v. Passer, 13 F.3d 275, 278 (8th Cir.1994), cert. denied, — U.S. -, *105 114 S.Ct. 1859 , 128 L.Ed.2d 482 (1994) (the ability to pay part of the cost of adequate representation at any time while charges are pending against a defendant shall not preclude the appointment of counsel for the defendant)).

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 (7)

CaseCitedYears
Builders Association of the Twin Cities v. Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry green
minnctapp · 2015
1 sentence

2016Id. at 274 .

12016–2016
Teigen v. Jelco of Wisconsin, Inc. green
wis · 1985
2 sentences

2010In Teigen the excess insurer challenged the dismissal of a primary insurer from the action following the execution of a Loy release and pointed out that, unlike in Loy , its policy premium was "calculated with the expectation that the cost of defense of any claim would be borne by ... the primary carrier.” 367 N.W.2d at 809 .

2010Accordingly, the excess insurer in Teigen argued that a Loy release would unfairly prejudice its rights by allowing the primary insurer to force it to defend the lawsuit without pay *706 ing up to the full policy limits of the primary policy. 367 N.W.2d at 809 .

12010–2010
Oconomowoc Residential Programs, Incorporated v. City Of Milwaukee green
ca7 · 2002
1 sentence

2003Id.

12003–2003
Saenz Soliz v. United States green
scotus · 1994
1 sentence

1996Minn.R.Crim.P 5.02(5) “ ‘recognizes that one who can pay part but not all of the cost of his defense cannot be denied appointment of counsel.’ ” Id. at 895 (quoting Hanson v. Passer, 13 F.3d 275, 278 (8th Cir.1994), cert. denied, — U.S. -, *105 114 S.Ct. 1859 , 128 L.Ed.2d 482 (1994) (the ability to pay part of the cost of adequate representation at any time while charges are pending against a defendant shall not preclude the appointment of counsel for the defendant)).

11996–1996
Hastings v. United Pacific Insurance Co. green
minn · 1982
1 sentence

1989The Hastings court found the cost requirement unfulfilled by an offer that simply stated that optional coverage “may be purchased.” Hastings, 318 N.W.2d at 853 .

11989–1989
McElhone v. Geror green
minn · 1940
2 sentences

1981McElhone v. Geror, 207 Minn. 580 , 292 N.W. 414 (1940); People v. Kahn, *104 19 Cal.App.Supp.2d 758 , 60 P.2d 596 (1936).

1981McElhone v. Geror, 207 Minn. 580 , 292 N.W. 414 (1940); People v. Kahn, *104 19 Cal.App.Supp.2d 758 , 60 P.2d 596 (1936).

11981–1981
People v. Kahn green
calctapp · 1936
2 sentences

1981McElhone v. Geror, 207 Minn. 580 , 292 N.W. 414 (1940); People v. Kahn, *104 19 Cal.App.Supp.2d 758 , 60 P.2d 596 (1936).

1981McElhone v. Geror, 207 Minn. 580 , 292 N.W. 414 (1940); People v. Kahn, *104 19 Cal.App.Supp.2d 758 , 60 P.2d 596 (1936).

11981–1981

Where else courts name it

CA 82 (1915–2026) NY 28 (1899–2019) LA 20 (1980–2018) IL 20 (1916–2022) MI 18 (1945–2024) NJ 18 (1971–2024) TX 17 (1986–2026) WA 16 (1972–2019) CO 16 (1960–2026) MD 15 (1975–2019) FL 14 (1981–2025) AZ 12 (1965–2019) PA 12 (1937–2017) MA 11 (1903–2026) IA 10 (1972–2025) MO 10 (1983–2021) MS 9 (1986–2004) WI 8 (1947–2026) AK 8 (1973–2025) CT 7 (1995–2019) MN 7 (1981–2016) GA 7 (1983–2025) OH 7 (1993–2024) OK 6 (1962–2015) TN 6 (1985–2013) IN 6 (2010–2020) KS 6 (1913–2009) NH 5 (2008–2021) NM 5 (1990–2015) VA 5 (1955–2026) NC 5 (1992–2018) OR 4 (1933–2021) HI 4 (2009–2016) RI 3 (1981–2006) WY 3 (1984–2021) AL 2 (1986–2010) SC 2 (1977–1999) UT 2 (1990–1997) DC 2 (1982–2025) ID 2 (1992–1997) NV 2 (1995–2021) MT 2 (1998–2003) NE 2 (1983–1984)

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