Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 14. ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 14.45 (2026)

Rule Declared Invalid

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

In proceedings under section 14.44, the court shall declare the rule invalid if it finds that it violates constitutional provisions or exceeds the statutory authority of the agency or was adopted without compliance with statutory rulemaking procedures. Any party to proceedings under section 14.44, including the agency, may appeal an adverse decision of the court of appeals to the supreme court as in other civil cases.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 25 cases, 1984–2016 · leading case: Mammenga v. State Dep't of Human Servs., 442 N.W.2d 786 (Minn. 1989).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Mammenga v. State Dep't of Human Servs., 442 N.W.2d 786 (Minn. 1989). · cites it 8× “69, list "arbitrary or capricious" as a ground for review because a pre-enforcement challenge does not involve review of an agency decision in a particular case.”
Manufactured Hous. Inst. v. Pettersen, 347 N.W.2d 238 (Minn. 1984). · cites it 8× “” Section 14.45 defines the scope of judicial review, stating that “[i]n proceedings under section 14.”
Save Mille Lacs Sportsfishing, Inc. v. Minnesota Dep't of Nat. Resources, 859 N.W.2d 845 (Minn. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 12× “Minn. Stat. § 14.45 (2014). We do not possess the authority to expand the scope of judicial review at a pre-enforcement proceeding.”
Minnesota Chamber of Com. v. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 469 N.W.2d 100 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 6× “Minn.Stat. § 14.45 (1990) defines this court’s scope of review in a pre-en-forcement challenge.”
Contested Cases of St. Otto's Home v. Minnesota Dep't of Human Servs., 437 N.W.2d 35 (Minn. 1989). · cites it 2× “See Minn.Stat. § 14.45 *43 (1988); White Bear Lake Care Center v.”
Contested Case of Christian Nursing Ctr. v. Dep't of Human Servs., 419 N.W.2d 86 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 8× “Minn.Stat. § 14.45 (1986) provides the following scope of review: In proceedings under section 14.”
Minnesota League of Credit Unions v. Minnesota Dep't of Com., 486 N.W.2d 399 (Minn. 1992). · cites it 6× “Petitioner, Minnesota League of Credit Unions, seeks review of the court of appeals’ decision upholding an administrative rule pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 14.45 (1991). The court of appeals held that Minn.”
Jewish Cmty. Action v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 657 N.W.2d 604 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 8× “Minn.Stat. § 14.45 (2002). Although petitioners challenge the rules on all three grounds provided in section 14.”
Minnesota League of Credit Unions v. Minnesota Dep't of Com., 467 N.W.2d 42 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 6× “Minn.Stat. § 14.45. See Minnesota-Dakotas Retail Hardware Ass’n v.”
Coalition of Greater Minnesota Cities v. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency, 765 N.W.2d 159 (Minn. Ct. App. 2009). · cites it 2× “The reviewing court “shall declare the rule invalid if it finds that it violates constitutional provisions or exceeds the statutory authority of the agency or was adopted without compliance with statutory rule-making procedures.”
Blocher Outdoor Advert. Co. v. Minnesota Dep't of Transp., 347 N.W.2d 88 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 14.45 (in a pre-enforcement rule challenge the court shall declare a rule invalid if it violates constitutional provisions, exceeds the statutory authority of the agency, or was adopted without compliance with statutory rulemaking procedures).”
Broen Mem'l Home v. Minnesota Dep't of Human Servs., 364 N.W.2d 436 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 14.45 (in a pre-enforcement rule challenge the court shall declare a rule invalid if it violates constitutional provisions, exceeds the statutory authority of the agency, or was adopted without compliance with statutory rule-making procedures).”
Show all 25 citing cases →
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.