Supreme Court Opinions


IMPORTANT NOTICE

Appellate Courts will begin transmitting all notices, orders, and opinions electronically.

Beginning no later than July 1, 2011, the appellate courts will send notices, orders, opinions and correspondence related to pending cases to attorneys in those cases by e-mail rather than postal mail.  All attorneys with pending appellate cases who have not already registered an e-mail address should do so immediately.  Unrepresented parties with pending appellate cases may also participate in this e-notification system by registering an e-mail address.  Please go to the Clerk of Appellate Courts page for instructions how to register your e-mail address.
 

PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED OPINIONS

Please visit the Minnesota State Law Library's Appellate Opinions Archive for previously published Supreme Court Opinions.

NOTE: If you are having trouble accessing the tabs on your mobile device, you may view all Opinions and Orders on a single page.


OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT

FILED Wednesday, May 14, 2025

NOTICE - MEDIA RELEASE TIME IS 10:00 A.M.


A22-1163   In the Matter of Keystone Township, et al., Appellants, vs. Red Lake Watershed District, Respondent, Paul Novacek, et al., Respondents.
                    Court of Appeals.
          1. The Red Lake Watershed District was authorized to conduct drainage improvement proceedings for Polk County Ditch 39—a ditch under the drainage authority of the Polk County Board of Commissioners—because, under Minn. Stat. § 103D.625 (2024) and our decision in Lenz v. Coon Creek Watershed District, 153 N.W.2d 209 (Minn. 1967), a watershed district need not first take over the ditch from the county before the watershed district conducts improvement proceedings for the ditch.
          2. The Red Lake Watershed District was authorized to conduct the proceedings without the involvement of county officials, insofar as the involvement of county officials would be inconsistent with the Watershed Law, Minn. Stat. ch. 103D (2022), and none of appellants’ other alleged procedural defects affected the Red Lake Watershed District’s authority to establish the improvement project over Ditch 39.
          Affirmed. Justice Gordon L. Moore, III.
          Took no part, Justice Sarah E. Hennesy, Justice Theodora K. Gaïtas.


A24-0847   Burnsville Medical Building, LLC, Relator, vs. County of Dakota, Respondent.
                    Minnesota Tax Court.
          1. The tax court did not err by using market rent rather than effective net rent to calculate the subject property’s potential gross income under the income capitalization approach to valuation because the taxpayer’s tenant improvement allowances and rent concessions were typical of the market.
          2. The tax court did not clearly err by rejecting the taxpayer’s proposed occupancy adjustment under the sales comparison approach to valuation.
          Affirmed. Justice Theodora K. Gaïtas.
Opinion SetsAs of June 1, 2023, the Supreme Court no longer provides opinion sets in Word Document format and Rich Text Format. Opinions are available in PDF format under the Opinions tab on this site.

Opinion Set in a Zipped PDF Format

  1. Click the above link.
  2. Save the unzipped file to your computer.
  3. Choose the "Open" option on the Download Complete screen.
  4. Extract the files to a location of your choice.
  5. Open the extracted file.

ORDERS ON PETITIONS FOR FURTHER REVIEW

FILED Wednesday, April 23, 2025


(Petitioner indicated in Italic Type)

POSTED THURSDAY AFTER SPECIAL TERM CONFERENCE
(Issues are as Presented in the Petition for Review)
 
 
Denied
 
1.             Allan N. Anderson, Jr., et al. vs. Westrock Minnesota Corporation f/k/a Waldorf Corporation – A24-0914
2.             Demetreious Anderson Baldwin vs. State of Minnesota – A24-0556, A24-0593
3.             Earl Lionell Ward vs. State of Minnesota – A24-0865
4.             In re Sina Roughani, State of Minnesota vs. Sina Roughani – A24-2042
5.             In the Matter of the Welfare of: D.C.D., Child – A24-0595
6.             Paul Casey Mason vs. State of Minnesota – A24-1074
7.             Sandra Kay Brown vs. Erik James Klein – A24-0238
8.             State of Minnesota vs. Anthony James Moore – A23-1841
9.             State of Minnesota vs. Harold Ladell Williams – A24-0156
10.           State of Minnesota vs. Malik Deshone Williams – A23-1598
11.           State of Minnesota vs. Nickolas John May – A24-0889
12.           State of Minnesota vs. Richard Preston Blackwell – A24-0311
13.           State of Minnesota vs. Shawn Michael Manton – A24-1071
14.           William O. Bradley vs. For Life Home Development LLC – A24-0813
15.           Zutz Farms, et al. vs. Middle Snake Tamarac Rivers Watershed District, Christian Erickson – A24-0352