Legal Opinion
State Ex Rel. Humphrey v. Casino Marketing Group, Inc.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided November 6, 1992No. C1-91-598PublishedCited by 26 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
COYNE, Justice.
We examine whether the trial court’s issuance of a temporary injunction enjoining Hall from using automatic dialing-announcing devices (ADADs) in contravention of Minn.Stat. §§ 325E.26-.311 during the *884pendency of this proceeding violates the first amendment of the United States Constitution or article I, section 3 of the Minnesota Constitution. The court of appeals concluded that the ADAD statute withstands commercial speech scrutiny. We affirm.
ADADs are machines that select telephone numbers by computer program and dial those numbers consecutively, at random, or at…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Central Hudson Gas & Electric Corp. v. Public Service CommissionSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Virginia State Board of Pharmacy v. Virginia Citizens Consumer Council, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Board of Trustees of State Univ. of NY v. FoxSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Metromedia, Inc. v. City of San DiegoSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Frisby v. SchultzSupreme Court of the United States · 1988
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by26 opinions
- Richard T. Van Bergen v. State of Minnesota Hubert H. Humphrey, Iii, in His Capacity as Attorney General of the State of MinnesotaCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1995
- State v. WicklundSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
- Bland v. FesslerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
- Bland v. FesslerCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1996
- Bergman v. District of ColumbiaDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2010
21 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.