Legal Opinion

Anderson v. Firle

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided April 20, 1928No. 26,731PublishedCited by 10 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

1 Reported in 219 N.W. 284. Appeal by a duly elected township supervisor from the judgment of the district court ousting him from office in an election contest on the ground that he had violated the corrupt practices act.

This court requested counsel to brief the question whether the act mentioned covers the ordinary township elections. The briefs have been furnished. In Miller v. Maier, 136 Minn. 231,

161 N.W. 513, 2 A.L.R. 399, the act was applied to the election of a town supervisor. But neither court nor counsel there questioned its applicability. However in Mathison v. Meyer, 159 Minn.…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Levy v. Industrial Finance Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1928
  2. Miller v. MaierSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1917
  3. Goenen v. SchroederSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1863
  4. Street v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1914
  5. Gutterson v. PearsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by10 opinions

  1. Honeywell, Inc. v. Minnesota Life & Health Insurance Guaranty Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
  2. A&H VENDING CO. v. Commissioner of RevenueSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2000
  3. Ubel v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1996
  4. Youngdale v. EastvoldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
  5. Danculovic v. ZimmermanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1931

5 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