Minnesota Statutes
Minn. Stat. § 105.37 (2026)
[Repealed]
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
[Repealed, 1990 c 391 art 10 s 4]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 22
cases, 1963–2000 · leading case: Pratt v. State, Dep't of Nat. Resources, 309 N.W.2d 767 (Minn. 1981).
Pratt v. State, Dep't of Nat. Resources, 309 N.W.2d 767 (Minn. 1981). “It also found the waters had been private prior to 1973; that the 1973 amendments to Minn. Stat. §§ 105.37 and 105.38 “caused previously private waters to be reclassified as public waters, thus subjecting the rice growing thereon to regulation by the state and vesting ownership…”
Bode v. Minnesota Dep't of Nat. Resources, 612 N.W.2d 862 (Minn. 2000). “The DNR determined that the designated tract of land met the definition of "wetlands" contained in Minn.Stat. § 105.37, subd. 15 (Supp.1979) which, in relevant part, required that wetlands in unincorporated areas be at least ten acres in size.”
Dep't of Nat. Resources v. Todd Cnty. Hearings Unit, 356 N.W.2d 703 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984). “” Minn.Stat. § 105.37, subd. 14(c) (1980). The published notice, however, stated that preliminarily-designated “public waters” could be considered for alternative designation as wetlands.”
Spaeth v. City of Plymouth, 344 N.W.2d 815 (Minn. 1984). “Minn.Stat. § 105.37, subd. 16 (1982), defines " ‘[o]rdinary high water level’ ’’ as “the boundary of public waters and wetlands, and shall be an elevation delineating the highest water level which has been maintained for a sufficient period of time to leave evidence upon the…”
Bode v. Minnesota Dep't of Nat. Resources, 594 N.W.2d 257 (Minn. Ct. App. 1999). “William Bode objected and, in August 1980, a hearings unit was constituted that determined 52-26 did not qualify as a protected wetland under Minn.Stat. § 105.37, subd. 15 (1980). The hearings unit issued the determination in a September 10, 1980, handwritten order.”
In Re Kaldahl, 418 N.W.2d 532 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988). “Kaldahl contested the restoration order but the administrative law judge concluded Five Lake is a “public water” within the meaning of Minn.Stat. § 105.37, subd. 14 (1984), and that the Bollenbach decision does not preclude the Commissioner from exercising regulatory control…”
In Re the Alteration of the Outlet Elevation of Plum Grove Lake, 297 N.W.2d 130 (Minn. 1980). “” The definition of beneficial public purpose was contained in § 105.37, subd. 6: Subd. 6. “Beneficial public purpose”, in relation to waters of the state, includes but is not limited to any or all of the following purposes: (a) Water supply for municipal, industrial, or…”
Caponi v. Carlson, 392 N.W.2d 591 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). “Minn.Stat. § 105.37, subd. 16 (1986). The district court then referred the case to the DNR for a determination of the OHWL both before and after storm sewer installation.”
Application of Christenson, 417 N.W.2d 607 (Minn. 1987). “Minn.Stat. § 105.37, subd. 15, provides: "Wetlands” includes, and shall be limited to all types 3, 4, and 5 wetlands as defined in the United States Fish & Wildlife Service Circular No.”
Schalow v. Mason, 357 N.W.2d 150 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984). “The ordinary or normal high water mark is defined by Minn.Stat. § 105.37, subd. 16 (1982): *152 “Ordinary high water level” means the boundary of public waters and wetlands, and shall be an elevation delineating the highest water level which has been maintained for a sufficient…”
State v. Feehan, 412 N.W.2d 309 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). “Minn.Stat. § 105.37, subd. 16 (1984) provides that the boundary of public waters is to be determined by the ”[o]rdinary high water level.”
Application of City of White Bear Lake, 247 N.W.2d 901 (Minn. 1976). “1971, § 105.37, by adding the following definition (L.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.