Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 15.0422 (2026)

[Repealed]

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

[Renumbered 14.62]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1962–1999 · leading case: Bode v. Minnesota Dep't of Nat. Resources, 594 N.W.2d 257 (Minn. Ct. App. 1999).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Bode v. Minnesota Dep't of Nat. Resources, 594 N.W.2d 257 (Minn. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “See Minn.Stat. § 15.0422, subd. 1 (1980) (the decision and order “shall be served upon each party * * * by first class mail”) (emphasis added); accord Commissioner of Natural Resources v.”

Citizens Ass'n of Georgetown, Inc. v. Dist. of Columbia Zoning Comm'n, 402 A.2d 36 (D.C. 1979). “[Minn.Stat.Ann. § 15.0422 (West 1977).] The Wisconsin legislature, too, apparently took care to make clear that state agencies were not required to articulate reasons in addition to their findings of basic fact.”

Plunkett v. First Nat'l Bank of Austin, 115 N.W.2d 235 (Minn. 1962). · cites it 3× “Section 15.0422 provides in part: “Every decision and order adverse to a party of the proceeding, rendered by an agency in a contested case, shall be in writing or stated in the record and shall be accompanied by a statement of the reasons therefor.”

Bryan v. Cmty. State Bank of Bloomington, 172 N.W.2d 771 (Minn. 1969). · cites it 2× “” Relator’s contention that the above 12 factors need not be spelled out in the commission’s findings is based on language in § 15.0422 requiring all agency decisions to be accompanied by a statement of reasons “consist[ing] of a concise statement of the conclusions upon each…”

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.