Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 171.25 (2026)

Enforcement; Delegation Of Authority

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

The commissioner shall be charged with the responsibility for the administration and execution of this chapter.

Any duties required of or powers conferred on the commissioner under the provisions of this chapter may be done and performed or exercised by any of duly authorized agents.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1985–2013 · leading case: Askildson v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 403 N.W.2d 674 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987).
Askildson v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 403 N.W.2d 674 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 171.25 (1986). There is a presumption as to the regularity and correctness of these administrative acts.”
Hintz v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 364 N.W.2d 486 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “It bears emphasizing that the determination to issue, revoke or cancel driving privileges rests with the Commissioner of Public Safety, Minn.Stat. § 171.25, not with the trial court.”
Gardner v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 423 N.W.2d 110 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 171.25 (1986); Antl v. State, Department of Public Safety, 353 N.”
Thompson v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 567 N.W.2d 280 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 2× “ISSUE Did the district court err in determining Thompson was not entitled to reinstatement of his school bus endorsement? ANALYSIS The decision whether to cancel a driver’s license endorsement rests with the Commissioner of Public Safety.”
Constans v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 835 N.W.2d 518 (Minn. Ct. App. 2013). “§ 171.25 (2012). A presumption of regularity and correctness applies when license matters are reviewed.”
Stavlo v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 379 N.W.2d 669 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 2× “The decision to cancel or deny driving privileges rests with the Commissioner of Public Safety, Minn.Stat. § 171.25 (1984), and there is a presumption of regularity and correctness to his administrative acts.”
Norman v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 404 N.W.2d 315 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “See Minn.Stat. § 171.25 (1984). The courts recognize this area as the Commissioner’s sphere of authority.”
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.