Legal Opinion

Smith v. Holm

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided September 21, 1945No. 34,146PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Loring, Chief Justice.

To a complaint seeking relief in the form of a declaratory judgment to the effect that the legislative redistricting act of 1913 (L. 1913, c. 91) had become unconstitutional by reason of unequal representation resulting from growth of population in various districts, the defendant demurred on the ground, among others, that it did not state a cause of action. From an order overruling the demurrer, accompanied by a certificate that the questions involved were important and doubtful, the defendant has appealed.

On the merits, the sole question presented is whether such…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State ex rel. Attorney General v. CunningamWisconsin Supreme Court · 1892
  2. Giddings v. BlackerMichigan Supreme Court · 1892
  3. Fergus v. MarksIllinois Supreme Court · 1926
  4. Williams v. Secretary of StateMichigan Supreme Court · 1906
  5. Cooke v. IversonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1909

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Baker v. CarrSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Dyer v. Kazuhisa AbeDistrict Court, D. Hawaii · 1956
  3. Magraw v. DonovanDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1958
  4. Honsey v. DonovanDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1964
  5. Duxbury v. DonovanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1965

8 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