Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 503.15 (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[Repealed]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 1969 [Temporary]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2011–2012 · leading case: Sawh v. City of Lino Lakes, 823 N.W.2d 627 (Minn. 2012).
Sawh v. City of Lino Lakes, 823 N.W.2d 627 (Minn. 2012). · cites it 14× “Under the City Code, [i]f an owner of an animal has subsequently violated the provisions under § 503.15 with the same animal, the ani *637 mal must be seized by animal control.”
Sawh v. City of Lino Lakes, 800 N.W.2d 663 (Minn. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 7× “Sawh a letter notifying her that, under Lino Lakes Code of Ordinances § 503.15, she was “allowed to request a hearing before the City Council to review the dangerous animal determination.”
Minn. Stat. § 503.15(1): 1 case
Sawh v. City of Lino Lakes, 800 N.W.2d 663 (Minn. Ct. App. 2011). “Sawh a letter notifying her that, under Lino Lakes Code of Ordinances § 503.15, she was “allowed to request a hearing before the City Council to review the dangerous animal determination.”
Minn. Stat. § 503.15(3)(a): 2 cases
Sawh v. City of Lino Lakes, 823 N.W.2d 627 (Minn. 2012). “Under the City Code, [i]f an owner of an animal has subsequently violated the provisions under § 503.15 with the same animal, the ani *637 mal must be seized by animal control.”
Sawh v. City of Lino Lakes, 800 N.W.2d 663 (Minn. Ct. App. 2011). “Sawh a letter notifying her that, under Lino Lakes Code of Ordinances § 503.15, she was “allowed to request a hearing before the City Council to review the dangerous animal determination.”
Minn. Stat. § 503.15(3)(a)(5): 1 case
Sawh v. City of Lino Lakes, 823 N.W.2d 627 (Minn. 2012). “Under the City Code, [i]f an owner of an animal has subsequently violated the provisions under § 503.15 with the same animal, the ani *637 mal must be seized by animal control.”
Minn. Stat. § 503.15(3)(b): 1 case
Sawh v. City of Lino Lakes, 800 N.W.2d 663 (Minn. Ct. App. 2011). “Sawh a letter notifying her that, under Lino Lakes Code of Ordinances § 503.15, she was “allowed to request a hearing before the City Council to review the dangerous animal determination.”
Minn. Stat. § 503.15(3)(d): 1 case
Sawh v. City of Lino Lakes, 823 N.W.2d 627 (Minn. 2012). “Under the City Code, [i]f an owner of an animal has subsequently violated the provisions under § 503.15 with the same animal, the ani *637 mal must be seized by animal control.”
Minn. Stat. § 503.15(4): 2 cases
Sawh v. City of Lino Lakes, 823 N.W.2d 627 (Minn. 2012). “Under the City Code, [i]f an owner of an animal has subsequently violated the provisions under § 503.15 with the same animal, the ani *637 mal must be seized by animal control.”
Sawh v. City of Lino Lakes, 800 N.W.2d 663 (Minn. Ct. App. 2011). “Sawh a letter notifying her that, under Lino Lakes Code of Ordinances § 503.15, she was “allowed to request a hearing before the City Council to review the dangerous animal determination.”
Minn. Stat. § 503.15(5): 1 case
Sawh v. City of Lino Lakes, 823 N.W.2d 627 (Minn. 2012). “Under the City Code, [i]f an owner of an animal has subsequently violated the provisions under § 503.15 with the same animal, the ani *637 mal must be seized by animal control.”
Minn. Stat. § 503.15(5)(b): 1 case
Sawh v. City of Lino Lakes, 823 N.W.2d 627 (Minn. 2012). “Under the City Code, [i]f an owner of an animal has subsequently violated the provisions under § 503.15 with the same animal, the ani *637 mal must be seized by animal control.”
Minn. Stat. § 503.15(6): 1 case
Sawh v. City of Lino Lakes, 823 N.W.2d 627 (Minn. 2012). “Under the City Code, [i]f an owner of an animal has subsequently violated the provisions under § 503.15 with the same animal, the ani *637 mal must be seized by animal control.”
Minn. Stat. § 503.15(7): 1 case
Sawh v. City of Lino Lakes, 823 N.W.2d 627 (Minn. 2012). “Under the City Code, [i]f an owner of an animal has subsequently violated the provisions under § 503.15 with the same animal, the ani *637 mal must be seized by animal control.”
Minn. Stat. § 503.15(7)(a): 1 case
Sawh v. City of Lino Lakes, 823 N.W.2d 627 (Minn. 2012). “Under the City Code, [i]f an owner of an animal has subsequently violated the provisions under § 503.15 with the same animal, the ani *637 mal must be seized by animal control.”
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.