Legal Opinion
Woodruff v. 2008 Mercedes
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided April 22, 2013No. A12-1117PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HUDSON, Judge.
This appeal is from an order granting respondents’ petition challenging forfeiture of the appellant vehicle because the owner, respondent Julie Tollefson, did not have actual or constructive knowledge that the vehicle would be operated in a manner contrary to law by its driver, respondent Terry Woodruff. While this case was pending, the Minnesota Supreme Court released its opinion in Patino v. One 2007 Chevrolet, 821 N.W.2d 810, holding that after a timely demand for judicial determination of forfeiture is made, if the person charged with a designated offense under…
2Cases cited24 opinions
- Chevron Oil Co. v. HusonSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Harper v. Virginia Department of TaxationSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Hoff v. KemptonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- State v. HannukselaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Briles v. 2013 GMC Terrain, MN License No.: 168KSE, VIN: 2GKFLZE3XD6336507Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2017
- Cardiovascular Systems, Inc. v. Cardio Flow, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2020
- Ramon Jimenez Ruiz v. State of MinnesotaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2015