Legal Opinion
Meath v. Harmful Substance Compensation Board
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided June 20, 1996No. C6-94-76PublishedCited by 25 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
COYNE, Justice.
The Harmful Substance Compensation Board denied respondent Marlene Meath’s claim for compensation from the harmful substance compensation account established pursuant to Minn.Stat. §§ 115B.20 and 115B.26, subd. 1 (1992). Meath then petitioned for certiorari to the court of appeals. In response to the Board’s contention that, pursuant to MinmStat. § 115B.35, subd. 8 (1992), the court lacked jurisdiction to review the Board’s decision, the court of appeals held that availability of judicial review of an administrative agency’s quasi-judicial decisions is constitutionally…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Honn v. City of Coon RapidsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
- State Ex Rel. Ging v. Board of EducationSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
- Breimhorst v. BeckmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1949
- Dietz v. Dodge CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
- Dokmo v. Independent School District No. 11Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by25 opinions
- Marriage of Holmberg v. HolmbergSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
- Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy v. Metropolitan CouncilSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
- Handicraft Block Ltd. Partnership v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2000
- Kline v. Berg Drywall, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
- County of Washington v. City of Oak Park HeightsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
20 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.