Minnesota Statutes
Minn. Stat. § 484.02 (2026)
Concurrent Jurisdiction; Boundary Waters
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
For the purposes of exercising the concurrent jurisdiction of the courts of this state in civil and criminal cases arising upon rivers or other waters which constitute a common boundary to this and any adjoining state, the counties bordering upon such waters shall be deemed to include so much of the area thereof as would be included if the boundary lines of such counties were produced in the direction of their approach and extended to the opposite shore.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1
case, 2009–2009 · leading case: Christian v. Birch, 763 N.W.2d 50 (Minn. Ct. App. 2009).
Christian v. Birch, 763 N.W.2d 50 (Minn. Ct. App. 2009). “Christian argues that a choice-of-law analysis was inappropriate, and that Minnesota law should automatically apply, because Minnesota has concurrent jurisdiction over the lawsuit.”
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.