Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Scroggins v. Solchaga, 552 N.W.2d 248 (1996)

Citation
Scroggins v. Solchaga, 552 N.W.2d 248 (1996)
Parent Document
Scroggins v. Solchaga, 552 N.W.2d 248 (1996)
Jurisdiction
Minnesota (state)
Effective Date
1996-07-16

Other Sections in This Document (54)

Full Text

781 chars
The provision that the district court applied states that “all or a portion of the rent in escrow [may] be released for the purpose of remedying the violation * * *.” Minn.Stat. § 566.34, subd. 10(a)(2). The provision tenant claims the district court should have applied does not specifically allow rent held by the court to be released to a landlord but, after listing various specific remedies, it states that the district court may “[g]rant any other relief the court deems just and proper * * *.” Minn.Stat. § 566.25(f). Therefore, the statute tenant claims the district court should have applied confers on the district court the discretion to employ remedies not listed therein. To read the statute otherwise would improperly render the “other relief’ clause meaningless. See