Legal Opinion

Henry v. Minnesota Public Utilities Commission

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided April 12, 1985No. C9-84-1950PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

AMDAHL, Chief Justice.

The petitioner Evan Henry, appearing pro se, seeks further review of an order of the Court of Appeals denying his petition for writ of certiorari for failure to comply with Minn.R.Civ.App.P. 115.02 and 115.03, subd. 1. We grant the petition for further review for the limited purpose of remanding the matter to the Court of Appeals for decision on the merits of the appeal.

The Court of Appeals discharged the writ of certiorari upon the bases that the petitioner failed to present both a petition for a writ of certiorari and a proposed writ to the Clerk of the Appellate…

2Cited by3 opinions

  1. Harms v. Oak MeadowsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2000
  2. Matter of Ultraflex Enterprises'appealCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992
  3. Harms v. Oak MeadowsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2000

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API