Legal Opinion

State Ex Rel. Laurisch v. Johnson

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 17, 1943No. 33,741PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Julius J. Olson, Justice.

A Avrit of prohibition is Avanted to prevent respondents, as district judges, from “presiding or taking any further part” in a certain cause noAv pending there.

The facts upon Avhich the Avrit is predicated are found in State ex rel. Laurisch v. Pohl, 214 Minn. 221, 8 N. W. (2d) 227, to Avhich reference is directed. That Avas a suit in mandamus to compel the board of county commissioners of Blue Earth county to redistrict their county. We there sustained the order of the trial court, Avhich provided that the commissioners should “proceed forthwith” to redistrict their…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Laurisch v. PohlSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
  2. Abraham v. BymanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
  3. State v. FinleySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
  4. State Ex Rel. Palarine v. FergusonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1938

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Huhn v. Foley Bros. Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1946
  2. Kienlen v. KienlenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1948
  3. Marine v. WhippleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1960
  4. State Ex Rel. United Electrical, Radio & MacHine Workers v. EnersenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
  5. State Ex Rel. Haddock Engineers, Ltd. v. SwopeNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1952

2 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