Legal Opinion

Naftalin v. King

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided April 1, 1960No. 37,968PublishedCited by 16 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Frank T. Gallagher, Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment entered pursuant to plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings.

*499By Ex. Sess. L. 1959, c. 90, the legislature appropriated from the Minnesota State Building Fund to the commissioner of administration $38,049,982; to the commissioner of conservation $487,480; and to the regents of the University of Minnesota $14,457,150; making an aggregate, including reappropriations, of $52,994,612. Such appropriations are by specific items stating the location, institution, and particular purpose of each expenditure.

The question now presented…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Hertz v. WoodmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1910
  2. Park v. Employment Security CommissionMichigan Supreme Court · 1959
  3. State Ex Rel. Foster v. NaftalinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1956
  4. Fleckten v. LambertonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1897
  5. Naftalin v. KingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1958

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

3Cited by16 opinions

  1. Oanes v. Allstate Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2000
  2. PORT AUTHORITY OF CITY OF ST. PAUL v. FisherSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1964
  3. State v. VictorsenCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
  4. Johnson v. CummiskeyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2009
  5. Minnesota Energy & Economic Development Authority v. PrintySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984

11 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