Legal Opinion
Masters v. Commissioner, Minnesota Department of Natural Resources
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided January 18, 2000No. C1-99-1302PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
G. BARRY ANDERSON, Judge.
Appellants challenge the district court’s grant of summary judgment, claiming that 1996 Minn. Laws ch. 407 violates the single-subject-and-title-requirements of Minn. Const, art. IV, § 17. In addition, appellants argue that section 32 of chapter 407 is unconstitutional special legislation in violation of Minn. Const, art. XII, § 2. Because chapter 407 does not violate the single subject-and-title-requirements of the constitution and section 32 does not constitute special legislation, we affirm.
FACTS
This appeal involves 1996 Minn. Laws ch. 407, § 32, which…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- In Re HaggertySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- Matter of BlilieSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
- In Re TvetenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
- State Ex Rel. Mattson v. KiedrowskiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
- Wass v. AndersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Defenders of Wildlife v. VenturaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
- Unity Church of St. Paul v. StateCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2005
- BHGDN, LLC v. MinnesotaDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2009
- Defenders of Wildlife v. VenturaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001