State v. Northwest Linseed Co.

4 Citing cases

  1. State v. Elam

    250 Minn. 274 (Minn. 1957)   Cited 18 times
    Holding chapter 278 is the "exclusive remedy by which [] taxpayers" may challenge property-tax assessments

    3. It is true that repeal by implication is not ordinarily favored. State v. City of Duluth, 238 Minn. 128, 56 N.W.2d 416; State v. Northwest Linseed Co. 209 Minn. 422, 297 N.W. 635. It is apparent, however, that c. 278 and § 279.15 covered the same subject matter. The former is a revision of the method of procedure and provides an entirely different method by which defenses with reference to assessed valuations may be asserted.

  2. Wichelman v. Messner

    250 Minn. 88 (Minn. 1957)   Cited 97 times
    Sustaining validity of Marketable Title Act

    Repeal by implication is not favored unless the latter statute fully covers the subject of the prior one and is manifestly inconsistent with it. State v. Northwest Linseed Co. 209 Minn. 422, 297 N.W. 635; 17 Dunnell, Dig. (3 ed.) § 8927. The Marketable Title Act, having been enacted after § 500.20, would not be unconstitutional even if it did conflict with § 500.20.

  3. Koenig v. Journeymen Barbers, Etc. Union

    20 N.W.2d 332 (Minn. 1945)

    There, as in this case, defendant sought to limit its liability to $100, on the theory that insured had been a continuous contributor only from June 1937 until his death in February 1939, a period of less than two years. We held defendant's constitution (Article V, § 16) to be applicable and that that provision did not require ( 210 Minn. 189, 297 N.W. 635) "a member to be a continuous contributing member for more than 15 years immediately prior to death in order to permit recovery for the full amount." Defendant seeks to distinguish the Wait case. Insofar as principle is concerned, there is and can be no distinction. The only difference in the facts is that here the insured applied for and was granted a "retiring card" and was later suspended for failure to pay dues.

  4. City of Jackson v. County of Jackson

    214 Minn. 244 (Minn. 1943)   Cited 4 times

    A later statute covering the entire subject matter of and intended as a substitute for an earlier one, although it does not expressly refer to or purport to amend or to repeal it, operates to repeal it by implication, for the reason that the later statute is the last expression of the legislative will. State v. Northwest Linseed Co. 209 Minn. 422, 297 N.W. 635, appeal dismissed, 313 U.S. 544, 61 S.Ct. 960, 85 L. ed. 1511; Board of Education v. Borgen, 192 Minn. 367, 256 N.W. 894. In Washburn, Mayor, v. Paducah Newspapers, Inc. 275 Ky. 527, 532, 121 S.W.2d 911, 914, the court said: