Legal Opinion
Woodhall v. State
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided September 13, 2007No. A05-2424, A05-2525PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MEYER, Justice.
Appellants Woodhall and Pieh (collectively appellants) appealed to the district court from separate condemnation awards. Respondent State of Minnesota filed motions to dismiss the appeals, and the district court granted both motions, holding that the court had no subject matter jurisdiction over the appeals because appellants failed to serve notice of appeal on all parties entitled to service under MinmStat. § 117.145 (2006). The appeals were consolidated, and the court of appeals affirmed dismissal of the appeals. We affirm.
In October 2002, the state filed a petition in…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Board of Regents of State Colleges v. RothSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Barnhart v. ThomasSupreme Court of the United States · 2003
- Oanes v. Allstate Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2000
- Harms v. Independent School District No. 300Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
- International Harvester Credit Corp. v. GoodrichSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Larson v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
- State v. PakhnyukSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2019
- State v. ObetaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
- Emerson v. Board of Independent School District 199Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
- Leiendecker v. Asian Women United of MinnesotaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2017
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.