Minnesota Statutes
Minn. Stat. § 87.01 (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[Repealed]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[Repealed, 1996 c 310 s 1]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1951–2018 · leading case: Ouradnik v. Ouradnik, 897 N.W.2d 300 (Minn. Ct. App. 2017).
Ouradnik v. Ouradnik, 897 N.W.2d 300 (Minn. Ct. App. 2017). “Minn. Stat. § 87.01 (1961). In the original version, the policy underlying the recre *307 ational-use statute was to “promote the use of privately owned lands and waters by the public for beneficial outdoor recreational purposes.”
Hughes v. Quarve & Anderson Co., 338 N.W.2d 422 (Minn. 1983). “Finally, I conclude that the trial court erred in not submitting Minn.Stat. § 87.01 (1982) for consideration by the jury.”
Ouradnik v. Ouradnik, 912 N.W.2d 674 (Minn. 2018). “We note that Hughes was decided based on the language of Minn. Stat. §§ 87.01 -.03 (1982). 338 N.W.”
Hovet v. City of Bagley, 325 N.W.2d 813 (Minn. 1982). “3 However, a review of the titles of the bills passed by the legislature and of the statement of purpose contained in Minn. Stat. § 87.01 (1980) persuades us that the legislature did not intend cities to be protected by the statute.”
Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. v. Rader, 98 F. Supp. 44 (D. Minnesota 1951). “Stats, of 1949, § 87.01 et seq., follows the Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act, and by its terms permits the court to render a declaratory judgment on “any” rights which may exist between the parties.”
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.