Legal Opinion

Lipinski v. Gould

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided February 17, 1928No. 26,494PublishedCited by 11 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

1 Reported in 218 N.W. 123, 730. This is an appeal from an order overruling a demurrer to plaintiff's complaint, the trial court having certified that the questions presented are important and doubtful.

Plaintiff is a resident taxpayer of this state and is engaged in the business of buying and selling fish. Defendant is the state game and fish commissioner. Plaintiff alleges that acting under and pursuant to L. 1919, p. 365, c. 341, defendant has been, and intends to continue, conducting "state fishing operations," and has been and intends to continue, buying and selling in the open market…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Geer v. ConnecticutSupreme Court of the United States · 1896
  2. Rippe v. BeckerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1894
  3. State v. EvansSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
  4. Schulte v. FitchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1925
  5. State Ex Rel. Putnam v. HolmSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927

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

3Cited by11 opinions

  1. State Docks Commission v. BarnesSupreme Court of Alabama · 1932
  2. State Ex Rel. Wilkinson v. MurphySupreme Court of Alabama · 1939
  3. Visina v. FreemanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1958
  4. Minneapolis Gas Co. v. ZimmermanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1958
  5. Minnesota Housing Finance Agency v. HatfieldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1973

6 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