 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Brown v. Cannon Falls Twp., A05-2340, A05-2341, A05-2342, A05-2343,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, October 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court erred in ordering removal of appellants from positions as township board members because legislature intended that in order to remove public official under open meeting law, the official must have been found to have intentionally violated the law in three separate proceedings; here, the four separate complaints were tried together.
|
|||||
| County of Morrison v. Wheeler, A05-2002,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, October 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: County's amended adult-use businesses ordinance (AUB) did not violate the First Amendment because the business owners failed to raise direct doubt regarding the studies county relied on when making determinations regarding adverse secondary effects of AUBs and because there was commercial land in the county fit for use by AUBs under the ordinance.
|
|||||
| In re Welfare of C.T.L., A06-874,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, October 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The portions of Minn. Stat. § 299C.105, subd. 1(a)(1) and (3), that directed law-enforcement personnel to take a biological specimen from a person who had been charged, but not convicted, violated the Fourth Amendment and Minn. Const. art. I, § 10; person's privacy interest was not outweighed by State's interest in taking specimen for DNA analysis.
|
|||||
| In re Estate of Jotham, A05-438,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, October 12, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Challenge by a decedent's daughter of a presumption of the decedent's paternity of a purported heir for purposes of intestate succession was not an "appropriate action" under Minn. Stat. § 257.55, subd. 2 because the daughter did not satisfy the standing and timeliness requirements of Minn. Stat. § 257.57, subd. 1(b).
|
|||||
| State v. Clark, A04-1101,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, October 12, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In trial for possession of firearm by a prohibited person, fleeing a police officer, and theft of a car, trial court did not err in denying defendant's request for substitute counsel or in failing to appoint advisory counsel because a defendant, who proceeded pro se, was not entitled, pursuant to Minn. Const. art. 1, § 6, to advisory counsel.
|
|||||
| State v. Hall, A05-1534,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, October 12, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Conviction against defendant for first-degree murder under Minn. Stat. § 609.185(a)(1) was reversed because it was error to instruct the jury on transferred intent under the facts presented in the case. The transferred intent instruction improperly relieved the State of proving premeditation, an essential element of first-degree murder.
|
|||||
| Toth v. Arason, A04-769,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, October 12, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Although the shop owner admitted to a violation of the Truth in Repairs Act, the truck owner did not have a remedy because Minn. Stat. § 325F.64, subd. 1 precluded recovery for such violations by the vehicle owner when the owner's insurer had paid over 90% of the vehicle repair costs. Owner's claim under Minn. Stat. § 325F.69 was not preserved.
|
|||||
| In re Estate of Barg, A05-2346,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, October 17, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In claim for reimbursement of Medicaid payments, county was entitled to a claim decedent's one-half interest in joint-tenancy property obtained during marriage and transferred to husband because, under Minn. Stat. § 256B.15, interest of deceased medical-benefits recipient in transferred joint-tenancy property was determined by real property law.
|
|||||
| In re Child of T.T.B., A05-1615 and A05-1631,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, October 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appeals court erred because the trial court had correctly concluded that there was good cause, as provided in Indian Child Welfare Act, 25 U.S.C.S. § 1911(b) and Minn. Stat. § 260.771, subd. 3, to deny transfer of jurisdiction to tribal court of parental termination proceedings where transfer petition was filed at advanced stage of proceedings.
|
|||||
| Urban v. Am. Legion Dep't, A04-1409,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, October 19, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment for state and national divisions of organization was proper because under Minn. Stat. § 340A.501, which made licensees responsible for the sale of alcohol by their employees, respondeat superior did not apply to divisions of organization that were not licensees.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
