Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 80A. REGULATION OF SECURITIES
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 80A.31 (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[Repealed]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[Repealed, 2006 c 196 art 1 s 51,52]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16 cases, 1981–2003 · leading case: Specialized Tours, Inc. v. Hagen, 392 N.W.2d 520 (Minn. 1986).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Specialized Tours, Inc. v. Hagen, 392 N.W.2d 520 (Minn. 1986). · cites it 6× “” Minn.Stat. § 80A.31 (1984). Thus, federal case law precedent on the issue is of considerable value.”
Stephenson v. Deutsche Bank AG, 282 F. Supp. 2d 1032 (D. Minnesota 2003). · cites it 4× “See Minn.Stat. § 80A.31 ("Sections 80A.01 to 80A.”
Foley v. Allard, 427 N.W.2d 647 (Minn. 1988). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 80A.31 (1980) provides that the Minnesota Securities Act is to be construed so as to “coordinate the interpretation of sections 80A.”
Carlson v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 623, 392 N.W.2d 216 (Minn. 1986). · cites it 2× “, Minn.Stat. § 80A.31 (1984)), it has not done so with respect to our state Human Rights Act.”
Austin Hayden v. Orison F. McDonald Etc., 719 F.2d 266 (8th Cir. 1983). “” Minn.Stat. § 80A.31 Finally, this case deals with essentially one set of facts, with which this court would need to refamiliarize itself on subsequent appeals.”
Minneapolis Employees Ret. Fund v. Allison-Williams Co., 519 N.W.2d 176 (Minn. 1994). · cites it 2× “” Minn.Stat. § 80A.31. Federal case law is of considerable value in deciding issues arising under the Act.”
Davis v. Midwest Disc. Sec., Inc., 439 N.W.2d 383 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 80A.31 (1988) provides that the Minnesota Securities Act is to be construed so as to "coordinate the interpretation of sections 80A.”
Kiehne v. Purdy, 309 N.W.2d 60 (Minn. 1981). · cites it 2× “31 shall be so construed as to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law of those states which enact it and to coordinate the interpretation of sections 80A.”
Fawcett v. Heimbach, 591 N.W.2d 516 (Minn. Ct. App. 1999). · cites it 2× “” Minn.Stat. § 80A.31 (1998). Federal caselaw is of considerable precedential value in deciding issues arising under the act.”
Semrad v. Edina Realty, Inc., 470 N.W.2d 135 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “Minn. Stat. § 80A.31 provides: [This act] shall be so construed as to effectuate its general purpose to make uniform the law of those states which enact it and to coordinate the interpretation of [this act] with the related federal regulation.”
Fairview Cemetery Ass'n of Stillwater v. Eckberg, 385 N.W.2d 812 (Minn. 1986). · cites it 2× “See Minn.Stat. § 80A.31. Second, we considered persuasive the United States Supreme Court’s decision in Wilko v.”
Anders v. Dakota Land & Dev. Co., Inc., 380 N.W.2d 862 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 2× “This conclusion is further supported by Minn. Stat. § 80A.31 (1974) which provides: Sections 80A.”
Show all 16 citing cases →
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.