Legal Opinion · Dissent

In Re Complaint Against the Sandy Pappas Senate Committee

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided January 22, 1992No. C7-91-1898Published

1DissentHuspeni, Judge

I respectfully dissent because I do not believe either statutory or case law supports the majority’s finding that complainant Doty has standing to appeal. The issue of standing to seek judicial review is distinct from the right to participate in agency proceedings. In re Implementation of Util. Energy Conservation Improvement Programs, 368 N.W.2d 308, 311-12 (Minn.App.1985). Participation in agency proceedings, alone, is insufficient to confer standing. Id. at 312. An individual who is adversely affected in fact by governmental action has standing to challenge the legality of that action,…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Valley Forge Christian College v. Americans United for Separation of Church and State, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  2. Diamond v. CharlesSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  3. State Board of Registration for Architects, Engineers, & Land Surveyors v. GetsugSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1971
  4. In Re the Implementation of Utility Energy Conservation Improvement ProgramsCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
  5. Kennedy v. L.D.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1988

1 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