Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 5. SECRETARY OF STATE
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 5.06 (2026)

Amendment To United States Constitution; Ratification, Notice

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

When the legislature shall ratify any amendment to the Constitution of the United States which shall be proposed by Congress, as provided by the Constitution of the United States, it shall be the duty of the secretary of state forthwith to transmit to the administrator of general services of the United States government official notice thereof. Such notice shall include the official certificate of the secretary of state of the action of the legislature ratifying any such amendment under the hand of the secretary of state and attested by the great seal of the state.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 8 cases, 1964–2015 · leading case: In Re Hennepin Cnty. 1986 Recycling Bond Litig., 540 N.W.2d 494 (Minn. 1995).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re Hennepin Cnty. 1986 Recycling Bond Litig., 540 N.W.2d 494 (Minn. 1995). · cites it 24× “on granted by this Section to the Company to prepay the loan by optional redemption of Series 1986 Bonds, the County shall have the right of optional redemption of Series 1986 Bonds with the consent of the Company, if and to the extent that moneys are on deposit in the…”
PTL, LLC v. Chisago Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 656 N.W.2d 567 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 3× “, Zoning Ordinance § 5.06(B)(10) (1997). Accordingly, the Fish Lake Township Board and Plat Review Commission recommended approval of PTL’s preliminary plat.”
Westland Capitol Corp. v. Lucht Eng'g Inc., 308 N.W.2d 709 (Minn. 1981). “O’Neal, supra, § 5.06. We note the new Minnesota Business Corporation Act, effective July 1, 1981, recognizes these agreements as lawful means for control of corporate affairs.”
EEC Prop. Co. v. Kaplan, 578 N.W.2d 381 (Minn. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “The arbitrator indicated the buyout would be based on the valuation method outlined in sections 5.06 and 5.07 of the EEC amended partnership agreement.”
Kearns v. Julette Originals Dress Co., 126 N.W.2d 266 (Minn. 1964). “After its 1939 amendment, the statute provided in part: “* * * The appealing parties shall also within the time limited for appeal serve a copy of such written notice of appeal upon all adverse parties and file the original thereof with the Industrial Commission * * L.”
Naegele Outdoor Advert. Co. of Minneapolis v. City of Lakeville, 532 N.W.2d 249 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995). “13, 1988); see also 2 Nichols’ The Law of Eminent Domain § 5.06[2] (Julius L. Saekman & Russell D.”
Jeffrey A. August, Relator v. Chisago Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 868 N.W.2d 741 (Minn. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “§ 5.06, subd. (C)(5) (2008). In deciding whether to issue or deny a CUP, the county’s zoning ordinance states, in relevant part, that the planning commission shall consider possible effects of the proposed conditional use based upon (but not limited to) the following general…”
Op. Atty. Gen. 852 (Minn. Att'y Gen. 1995). “…v. Code Technology, Inc., 628 F.2d 730 (1st Cir. 1980); see generally 1 M. Ninimer and D. Nimmer, Copyright, § 5.06[C] (1993); Patterson and Joyce, MQnQlei;ing the I£aw: the §cope of Copyright l§erectiQn for l¢aw Repoits and Statutg[y §§Qnipi]ations, 36 UCLA L. Rev.…”
— Minn. Stat. § 5.06(A) — 1 case
Jeffrey A. August, Relator v. Chisago Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 868 N.W.2d 741 (Minn. Ct. App. 2015). “§ 5.06, subd. (C)(5) (2008). In deciding whether to issue or deny a CUP, the county’s zoning ordinance states, in relevant part, that the planning commission shall consider possible effects of the proposed conditional use based upon (but not limited to) the following general…”
— Minn. Stat. § 5.06(B)(10) — 1 case
PTL, LLC v. Chisago Cnty. Bd. of Commissioners, 656 N.W.2d 567 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003). “, Zoning Ordinance § 5.06(B)(10) (1997). Accordingly, the Fish Lake Township Board and Plat Review Commission recommended approval of PTL’s preliminary plat.”
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.