Dehning v. Marshall Produce Co.
This text of 10 N.W.2d 229 (Dehning v. Marshall Produce Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Certiorari to review an order of the commissioner of agriculture, dairy and food revoking a wholesale produce dealer’s license issued to the “Marshall Produce Company and/or Ortonville Produce Company” June 17, 1942, pursuant to Minn. St. 1941, § 27.04 (Mason St. 1940 Supp. § 6240-18½c).
The writ issued out of this court February 23, 1943. The commissioner filed his return thereto March 10. The record and relators’ brief were filed April 27; respondents’ brief, May 17; relators’ reply brief, May 19; and the case was argued in this court May 26.
*340 The license here involved expired May 31, 1943. A decision of the case on its merits would not benefit either party to this proceeding. Decisions in this court should be limited to real controversies involving existing facts and rights asserted thereunder. Anderson v. Village of Louisberg, 121 Minn. 528, 141 N. W. 97; State ex rel. Klemer v. City Recorder, 129 Minn. 535, 152 N. W. 654; Troy v. City of St. Paul, 155 Minn. 391, 193 N. W. 726; Moore v. McDonald, 165 Minn. 484, 205 N. W. 894; McDonald v. Brewery and Beverage D. & H. & W. Union, 215 Minn. 274, 9 N. W. (2d) 770. The question here involved is moot.
Writ discharged.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
10 N.W.2d 229, 215 Minn. 339, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dehning-v-marshall-produce-co-minn-1943.