Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 2. TERRITORIAL DIVISIONS
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 2.13 (2026)

[Repealed]

✓ text as last checked Sept. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

MS 1957 [Repealed, Ex1959 c 45 s 70]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1974–1984 · leading case: State v. Olkon, 299 N.W.2d 89 (Minn. 1980).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Olkon, 299 N.W.2d 89 (Minn. 1980). · cites it 2× “13(1) (Proposed Official Draft 1962), provides: A public law enforcement official or a person acting in cooperation with such an official perpetrates an entrapment if for the purpose of obtaining evidence of the commission of an offense, he induces or encourages another person…”
Marriage of Moberg v. Moberg, 347 N.W.2d 791 (Minn. 1984). “As stated above, vacation was based on untimely service of the order to show cause, lack of evidence supporting the support and maintenance modification, and failure to continue the hearing on support and maintenance.”
Cooley v. Sigler, 381 F. Supp. 441 (D. Minn. 1974). “See, § 2.13, 39 Fed.Reg. at 20029. The statement of reasons: * * * should be sufficient to enable a reviewing body 2 to determine whether a parole has been denied for an impermissible reason or for no reason at all.”
Minn. Stat. § 2.13(1): 1 case
State v. Olkon, 299 N.W.2d 89 (Minn. 1980). “13(1) (Proposed Official Draft 1962), provides: A public law enforcement official or a person acting in cooperation with such an official perpetrates an entrapment if for the purpose of obtaining evidence of the commission of an offense, he induces or encourages another person…”
Minn. Stat. § 2.13(f): 1 case
Marriage of Moberg v. Moberg, 347 N.W.2d 791 (Minn. 1984). “As stated above, vacation was based on untimely service of the order to show cause, lack of evidence supporting the support and maintenance modification, and failure to continue the hearing on support and maintenance.”
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.