Kohn v. State Ex Rel. Humphrey

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that a purpose of the civil investigative demand power is to allow the Attorney General to “ascertain if there is any substance to . . . complaints from the party who is perhaps in the best position to know, namely, the party against whom the complaint is made”
• discussing the purpose of subdivision 2

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

8 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Netland
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 2009-02-12· cited 57×
• In Re GlaxoSmithKline Plc
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 2005-07-14· cited 51×
• Minnesota Twins Partnership v. State Ex Rel. Hatch
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1999-04-29· cited 22×
• In Re an Inquiry Concerning Agerter
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1984-08-17· cited 13×
• Wilson Corp. v. State Ex Rel. Udall
  New Mexico Court of Appeals· 1996-03-19· cited 7×
• Investigation of Highway Const. Industry
  South Dakota Supreme Court· 1986-11-26· cited 4×
• Office of Attorney General v. M.J.D.
  South Dakota Supreme Court· 1986-11-26· cited 3×
• State of Minnesota Office of the Attorney General v. Madison Equities, Inc.
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 2026-01-07

Cites

19 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• United States v. Powell
  Supreme Court· 1964-11-23· cited 1,511×
• United States v. Morton Salt Co.
  Supreme Court· 1950-02-06· cited 1,061×
• Oklahoma Press Publishing Co. v. Walling
  Supreme Court· 1946-02-11· cited 1,024×
• Hannah v. Larche
  Supreme Court· 1960-06-20· cited 819×
• United States v. White
  Supreme Court· 1944-06-12· cited 772×
• United States v. Kordel
  Supreme Court· 1970-02-24· cited 698×
• Bellis v. United States
  Supreme Court· 1974-05-28· cited 523×
• Scott v. Association for Childbirth at Home, International
  Illinois Supreme Court· 1981-11-20· cited 124×
• Matanuska Maid, Inc. v. State
  Alaska Supreme Court· 1980-11-21· cited 83×
• Attorney General v. Colleton
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1982-12-28· cited 67×
• Klein v. Fair Employment Practices Commission
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1975-08-07· cited 44×
• Minnesota State Bar Ass'n v. Divorce Assistance Ass'n
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1976-12-17· cited 43×
• Genuine Parts Company, Plaintiff-Appellant-Cross v. Federal Trade Commission, Defendants-Appellees-Cross
  Fifth Circuit· 1971-07-21· cited 36×
• Hair Industry, Ltd., Adorable Hair-Do Corp., Howard Tresses, Inc., George Rosen and Ruth Rosen v. United States
  Second Circuit· 1965-01-26· cited 35×
• Petition of Gold Bond Stamp Company
  D. Minnesota· 1963-08-09· cited 33×
• Steele v. State
  Washington Supreme Court· 1975-06-26· cited 20×
• State v. Alexander
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1979-05-18· cited 18×
• People Ex Rel. Babbitt v. Herndon
  Arizona Supreme Court· 1978-06-06· cited 14×
• Commonwealth Ex Rel. Hancock v. Pineur
  Kentucky Supreme Court· 1976-02-06· cited 10×