Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 23.01 (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[Repealed]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[Repealed, 1949 c 278 s 1]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1993–2015 · leading case: RDNT, LLC v. City of Bloomington, 861 N.W.2d 71 (Minn. 2015).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

RDNT, LLC v. City of Bloomington, 861 N.W.2d 71 (Minn. 2015). “§ 23.01. Even when planning became a standard part of zoning statutes, its function was not fully explained.”

Minnesota Mining & Mfg. Co. v. Rauh Rubber, Inc., 943 F. Supp. 1117 (D. Minnesota 1996). “3 McCarthy, Trademarks and Unfair Competition § 23.01[1] at 23-6 to 23-7. The existence or likelihood of customer confusion was highly contested in this case.”

Minnesota Pet-Breeders, Inc. v. Schell & Kampeter, Inc., 843 F. Supp. 506 (D. Minnesota 1993). “15 See McCarthy, § 23.01[4][e] (“ ‘Confusion’ means more than that the junior user’s mark merely ‘calls to mind’ the senior user’s mark.”

Am. Fed'n of State, Cnty. & Mun. Employees, Dist. Council No. 14, Local Union No. 551 v. Minneapolis Cmty. Dev. Agency, 520 N.W.2d 453 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “Section 23.01 of the collective bargaining agreement provides that disciplinary action may be imposed only for just cause upon an employee who has satisfactorily completed the initial probationary period.”

United States v. Hemme, 987 F. Supp. 2d 940 (D. Minnesota 2013). “Leech Lake Conservation Code § 23.01. The Code also prohibits the “taking of game fish for any purpose by use of gill nets except where such taking is for personal use.”

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.