Legal Opinion
State v. Deal
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided November 1, 2007No. A07-278PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
ANDERSON, PAUL H., Justice.
Ryan S. Deal is charged with criminal sexual conduct and is also a party to a marriage dissolution proceeding. He sought to use civil discovery in the dissolution proceeding to depose the alleged victim and a potential witness in the ongoing criminal proceeding. The State of Minnesota petitioned to intervene in the dissolution proceeding to stay the civil depositions for the duration of the criminal trial. The district court found that the state had no interest in the dissolution proceeding and denied the state’s petition to intervene and to stay the…
2Cases cited29 opinions
- Globe Newspaper Co. v. Superior Court, County of NorfolkSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Securities & Exchange Commission v. United States Realty & Improvement Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1940
- Ellis Campbell, Jr., District Director of Internal Revenue v. J. M. Eastland and Montez EastlandCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1962
- DLH, Inc. v. RussSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- Moylan v. MoylanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Allen Lloyd Lehmann v. Hon Susan Schultz Gibson Judge, Jefferson Circuit CourtKentucky Supreme Court · 2016
- Ynclan v. WoodwardSupreme Court of Oklahoma · 2010
- Franzwa v. City of HackensackDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2008
- State v. UnderdahlCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2008
- In Re BuckmasterCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2008
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.