Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 210A. FAIR CAMPAIGN PRACTICES
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 210A.02 (2026)

[Repealed]

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

[Repealed, 1988 c 578 art 2 s 12]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 6 cases, 1978–1987 · leading case: Menkevich v. Lefebvre, 303 N.W.2d 462 (Minn. 1981).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Menkevich v. Lefebvre, 303 N.W.2d 462 (Minn. 1981). · cites it 18× “Douglas Ryan made a false claim of party support, within the meaning of Minn.Stat. § 210A.02 (1980), in his campaign to be elected to the Anoka County Commission.”
Matter of Contest of Election in Del Primary, 344 N.W.2d 826 (Minn. 1984). · cites it 32× “Specifically, Daugherty alleges that the distribution of 13,000 documents, entitled "Official Sample Ballot," violated Minn.Stat. 210A.02 (1982), because the ballot falsely implied that Hilary was endorsed by the DFL party.”
Matter of Contest of Gen. Election, 264 N.W.2d 401 (Minn. 1978). · cites it 16× “We turn first to the trial court's conclusion that the statements in the circular quoted above falsely implied, in violation of § 210A.02, that Meland was supported or endorsed by the DFL party.”
Scheibel v. Pavlak, 282 N.W.2d 843 (Minn. 1979). · cites it 4× “In this case, contestee believed that his use of the initials `DFL' on his lawn signs and in his advertisements did not violate section 210A.02. It seems clear from the record that contestee intended only to indicate to the voters that he was a member of the DFL party.”
Schmitt v. McLaughlin, 275 N.W.2d 587 (Minn. 1979). · cites it 2× “In fact, in response to a letter from contestant objecting to his use of the initials “DFL”, contes-tee suggested that contestant could also indicate his own political party affiliation.”
Burns v. Valen, 400 N.W.2d 123 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 15× “His contest regarding the bar association paragraph is based on violation of Minn.Stat. §§ 210A.02, .04 concerning false statements.”
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.