Minnesota Statutes
Minn. Stat. § 211.08 (2026)
[Repealed]
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
MS 1957 [Repealed, 1959 c 675 art 13 s 1]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1953–2012 · leading case: Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60 (1960).
Talley v. California, 362 U.S. 60 (1960). “, 1949, § 25-1714; Minn. Stat. Ann. § 211.08 ; Page's Ohio Rev.”
Chandramouli Vaidyanathan v. Seagate US LLC, 691 F.3d 972 (8th Cir. 2012). “”) (interpreting Minn. Stat. § 211.08 ). Although a district court does not necessarily abuse its discretion in defining statutory elements for the jury, we conclude that the district court did so here because -6- the instruction did not fairly and adequately represent Minnesota…”
Bank v. Egan, 60 N.W.2d 257 (Minn. 1953). “The material portion of § 211.08 reads as follows: “* * * any person, firm, corporation or committee who shall knowingly make or publish or cause to be published, any false statement in relation to any candidate or proposition to be voted upon, which statement is intended to or…”
Moulton v. Newton, 144 N.W.2d 706 (Minn. 1966). “22, 2 caused contestee’s name to be printed on the general election ballot; and (3) contestee, in violation of § 211.08, 3 published and circulated campaign literature containing statements concerning contestant either false or giving false impressions, which statements were…”
Grotjohn v. McCollar, 191 N.W.2d 396 (Minn. 1971). “With respect to the claim that contestee violated § 211.08, the most that can be said is that he prepared a typewritten statement containing information showing that contestant, when he was 13 or 14 years of age, had broken into three business places in Morris and was probably…”
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.