Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 122. SCHOOL DISTRICTS: FORMATION AND COOPERATION
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 122.05 (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[Repealed]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[Repealed, 1957 c 947 art 9 s 9]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1947–1958 · leading case: Bricelyn Sch. Dist. No. 132 v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 55 N.W.2d 597 (Minn. 1952).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Bricelyn Sch. Dist. No. 132 v. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 55 N.W.2d 597 (Minn. 1952). · cites it 9× “Thereafter, in March 1950, the formation of a common school district was sought under §§ 122.05 to 122.08 from lands which were in part included within District No.”
Muehring v. Sch. Dist. No. 31, 28 N.W.2d 655 (Minn. 1947). “§ 122.05. Changing school district boundaries.”
Sullivan v. Jt. Indep. Consol. Sch. Dist. No. 102, 88 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. 1958). “In a consolidation proceeding, under § 122.21, subd. 4, a favorable vote by the districts maintaining only ungraded elementary schools, voting as a unit, is required.”
In Re Dissolution of Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 27, 60 N.W.2d 617 (Minn. 1953). “We held in that case that under §§ 122.05 to 122.08 a county board may not carve up a district reorganized under the provisions of M.”
Hubner v. Carson, 74 N.W.2d 419 (Minn. 1956). “In addition, the boundary change, merger, or annexation, must be approved by the school board of the district to which the other district or area is to be attached.” It is the contention of respondent, and apparently it was the opinion of the trial court when it amended its…”
In Re Merger of Certain Sch. Dists., Pipestone Cnty., 246 Minn. 110 (Minn. 1956). “In addition, the boundary change, merger, or annexation, must be approved by the school board of the district to which the other district or area is to be attached.”
Halvorsen v. Sch. Dist. No. 44, 91 N.W.2d 164 (Minn. 1958). · cites it 2× “1953, §§ 122.05 to 122.08, inclusive, which deal generally with the formation of districts.”
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.