Supreme Court of Minnesota· 11/18/2010
Larson v. State
Citations
- 790 N.W.2d 700
- 2010 Minn. LEXIS 680
- 2010 WL 4643074
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that when state holds an easement because of condemnation, it holds the easement “in its entirety” and the unused portion is not subject to discharge under condemnation statutes
- stating that a statute is ambiguous if it “is susceptible to more than one reasonable interpretation”
- stating that “the grammatical rule of the last antecedent . . . instructs that a limiting phrase . . . ordinarily modifies only the noun or phrase that it immediately follows”
- \[A] limiting phrase ... ordinarily modifies only the noun or phrase that it immediately follows.\
- “[A] rule of liberal construction does not apply where ... a statute is unambiguous on its face.”
- “The written instrument creating the easement ... defines the scope and extent of the interest in land.”
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Stras
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
60 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- State v. FleckSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2012-02-15· cited 122×
- Christianson v. HenkeSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2013-05-31· cited 99×
- Wong v. Minnesota Department of Human ServicesEighth Circuit· 2016-04-19· cited 79×
- State of Minnesota v. Don Antoine JonesSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2014-07-02· cited 65×
- State v. NelsonSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2014-02-12· cited 65×
- State v. HayesSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2013-02-27· cited 62×
- Carlton v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2012-07-18· cited 60×
- County of Dakota v. CameronSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2013-11-27· cited 55×
- Rew ex rel. T.C.B. v. BergstromSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2014-04-30· cited 52×
- State of Minnesota, Respondent/Cross-Appellant v. Bonnie Ann Lindquist, Appellant/Cross-Respondent.Supreme Court of Minnesota· 2015-08-19· cited 42×
- Alice Ann Staab v. Diocese of St. CloudSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2014-09-10· cited 39×
- 500, LLC v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2013-09-25· cited 39×
- Poehler v. Cincinnati Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota· 2017-07-19· cited 24×
- State of Minnesota v. Roger Benedict SchmidSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2015-02-25· cited 23×
- State of Minnesota v. Renee Anita VaskoSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2017-01-18· cited 22×
- In re the Estate of ButlerSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2011-09-21· cited 22×
- Emerson v. Board of Independent School District 199Supreme Court of Minnesota· 2012-02-01· cited 22×
- Billion v. Commissioner of RevenueSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2013-03-20· cited 21×
- KSTP-TV v. Ramsey CountySupreme Court of Minnesota· 2011-11-16· cited 19×
- State v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2019-01-09· cited 18×
Cites
11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Barnhart v. ThomasSupreme Court· 2003-11-12· cited 1,983×
- Tuma v. Commissioner of Economic SecuritySupreme Court of Minnesota· 1986-05-09· cited 179×
- American Tower, L.P. v. City of GrantSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2001-12-06· cited 122×
- Meister v. Western National Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1992-01-17· cited 88×
- Reiter v. KiffmeyerSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2006-09-28· cited 35×
- Woodhall v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2007-09-13· cited 23×
- Hwy. 7 Embers, Inc. v. Northwestern National BankSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1977-06-24· cited 17×
- LaBere v. PalmerSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1950-12-01· cited 13×
- Scherger v. Northern Natural Gas Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1998-03-05· cited 12×
- Cooperative Power Ass'n v. AasandSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1980-01-11· cited 8×
- Larson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Minnesota· 2009-12-22· cited 2×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.