Timothy Hall, Jr. v. State of Minnesota
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WORKE, Judge
This certified-question appeal under Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 103.03(i) arises from a constitutional challenge to MUPA. Appellants, the State of Minnesota and its commissioner of commerce, urge us to answer the district court’s certified question as to whether MUPA creates an unconstitutional taking in the negative, and answer the district court’s certified question as to whether MUPA meets procedural due-process requirements in the affirmative. We agree with appellants and reverse and remand.
FACTS
In 2011, respondent Timothy Hall Jr. did not receive his final paycheck from his…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1950
- Texaco, Inc. v. ShortSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Anderson National Bank v. LuckettSupreme Court of the United States · 1944
- Hauschildt v. BeckinghamSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
- Katherine Cerajeski v. Greg ZoellerCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2013
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Hall v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2018