Legal Opinion
Swenson v. Holsten
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided June 22, 2010No. A09-1889PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WRIGHT, Judge.
In this appeal from summary judgment in favor of respondents, appellant argues that the district court erred by concluding that Minnesota’s game and fish laws preclude a private individual such as appellant from acquiring a property interest in a dead black bear found on his property. We reverse and remand.
FACTS
Appellant R. James Swenson owns a farm in Fifty Lakes, Minnesota. According to Swenson, on or about November 1, 2007, he found a dead black bear 1 on his property and contacted a taxidermist to have the skull and hide preserved for display. The taxidermist…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Cooper v. FrenchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
- Fabio v. BellomoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
- Amaral v. Saint Cloud HospitalSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
- American Tower, L.P. v. City of GrantSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
- Frank's Nursery Sales, Inc. v. City of RosevilleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Beecroft v. Deutsche Bank National Trust Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2011
- Michael Jones v. Tom RoyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011
- Dimke v. FarrCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2011
- Armendariz v. RovneyDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2021