Minnesota Statutes
Minn. Stat. § 15.0426 (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[Repealed]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 14.70]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8
cases, 1965–1985 · leading case: In Re the Implementation of Util. Energy Conservation Improvement Programs, 368 N.W.2d 308 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985).
In Re the Implementation of Util. Energy Conservation Improvement Programs, 368 N.W.2d 308 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). “Hanna does not claim it is a party to the proceeding but rather claims that as a major industrial rate payer it is aggrieved and directly affected by the MPUC order.”
State Bd. of Reg. for Architects, Engineers, & Land Surveyors v. Getsug, 186 N.W.2d 686 (Minn. 1971). “Respondent has moved for a dismissal here on the ground that the board has no standing to appeal since it is not an “aggrieved party” within the meaning of § 15.0426, which permits appellate review of agency decisions.”
Minnesota Water Resources Bd. v. Cnty. of Traverse, 177 N.W.2d 44 (Minn. 1970). “Section 15.0426 grants the right of appeal only to an “aggrieved party.”
Minnesota Educ. Ass'n v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 404, 287 N.W.2d 666 (Minn. 1980). “09 (1961), we said that “a person having no interest in the subject * * * cannot be aggrieved * * More recently, in interpreting an “aggrieved party” under Minn.Stat. § 15.0426 (1978), we noted: “The word ‘aggrieved’ refers to a substantial grievance, a denial of some personal…”
Minnesota State Bd. of Health v. Governor's Certificate of Need Appeal Bd., 230 N.W.2d 176 (Minn. 1975). “This court has never considered the precise question of whether an administrative agency can be. an aggrieved person for the purpose of seeking judicial review under § 15.”
Minn. Bd. of Health v. Gov., Etc., App. Bd., 230 N.W.2d 176 (Minn. 1975). “This court has never considered the precise question of whether an administrative agency can be an aggrieved person for the purpose of seeking judicial review under § 15.”
Zimdars v. Special Sch. Dist. No. 1, 230 N.W.2d 465 (Minn. 1975). “” Pursuant to the provision of § 15.0426, the scope of review in this court is as provided in § 15.”
Austin S. & L. Ass'n v. First Nat. Bank of Stewartville, 133 N.W.2d 505 (Minn. 1965). “0424 provision is made for judicial review of orders such as this in the district court; and under § 15.0426 provision is made for review in this court of any final order or judgment of the district court under § 15.”
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.