Legal Opinion

St. Paul Companies, Inc. v. Hatch

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 15, 1989No. C5-88-2392PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

YETKA, Justice.

Is a statute which provides for a trial de novo review by the district court of a decision by the Commissioner of Commerce under Minn.Stat. § 60D.12, subd. 1 (1988) (the Insurance Holding Company Systems Act) constitutional? If so, how should such a review be conducted and what is the scope of the trial court’s authority? Both the trial court and the court of appeals refused to undertake a review of the commissioner’s order under the aforesaid statute and held the statute unconstitutional on its face under article III, section 1 of the Minnesota Constitution.

We reverse both the…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Securities & Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1947
  2. Reserve Mining Co. v. HerbstSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
  3. State ex rel. Dybdal v. State Securities CommissionSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1920
  4. Steenerson v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
  5. State v. SuessSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1952

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Alleghany Corp. v. HaaseCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1990
  2. Fedziuk v. Commissioner of Public SafetySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2005
  3. New Creative Enterprises, Inc. v. Dick Hume & Associates, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1993
  4. Investment Co. Institute v. HatchCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1991
  5. Medical Society v. BakkeNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2006

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API