Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 219. RAILROAD SAFETY AND EMPLOYMENT
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 219.402 (2026)

Adequate Crossing Protection

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

Crossing warning devices or improvements installed or maintained under this chapter as approved by the commissioner or any predecessor, whether by order or otherwise, are adequate and appropriate warning for the crossing.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 1993–2014 · leading case: McEwen v. Burlington N. R.R., 494 N.W.2d 313 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
McEwen v. Burlington N. R.R., 494 N.W.2d 313 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 24× “McEwen, as trustee for the heirs of Ruth Lysford, challenges the trial court's decision that her claims against respondent State of Minnesota in this wrongful death action are barred by statutory and discretionary immunity pursuant to Minn.Stat. §§ 219.402 and 3.736, subd. 3(b)…”
Hernandez Ex Rel. Hernandez v. State, 680 N.W.2d 108 (Minn. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 2× “The state also argued that it was entitled to vicarious official immunity and immunity under Minn.Stat. § 219.402 (2002). Hernandez moved for partial summary judgment, arguing that the district court should strike the state’s and city’s affirmative defenses of federal…”
Gary William Frieler v. BNSF Ry. Co. (Minn. Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 2× “Frieler also argues that the district court failed to address his alternate claim, that federal law also preempts Minn. Stat. § 219.402 (2012), which provides that “[c]rossing warning devices or improvements installed or maintained under this chapter as approved by the…”
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.