Legal Opinion

Fedziuk v. Commissioner of Public Safety

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided May 19, 2005No. A04-2328PublishedCited by 34 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HANSON, J.

In this declaratory judgment action, respondent Patricia Fedziuk asked the district court to hold that Minnesota’s Implied Consent Law, as amended in 2003, violates procedural due process. The district court determined that the Implied Consent Law’s prehearing revocation procedures violate due process. Because of the statewide impact of its decision, the court stayed its order and‘ certified two questions as “important and doubtful”:

1. Does Minnesota’s implied consent scheme of prehearing revocation offend a driver’s state and/or federal constitutional guarantees of due…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Chambers v. MississippiSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
  3. MacKey v. MontrymSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  4. Barry v. BarchiSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  5. Dixon v. LoveSupreme Court of the United States · 1977

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

3Cited by34 opinions

  1. Deegan v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2006
  2. Larson v. WasemillerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
  3. State of Minnesota v. Mahdi Hassan AliSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2014
  4. Bendorf v. Commissioner of Public SafetySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
  5. State v. LemmerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007

29 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