Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Cloverdale Foods of Minnesota, Inc. v. Snacks, 580 N.W.2d 46 (1998)

Citation
Cloverdale Foods of Minnesota, Inc. v. Snacks, 580 N.W.2d 46 (1998)
Parent Document
Cloverdale Foods of Minnesota, Inc. v. Snacks, 580 N.W.2d 46 (1998)
Jurisdiction
Minnesota (state)
Effective Date
1998-06-09

Other Sections in This Document (85)

Full Text

893 chars
Statutory interpretation is a question of law subject to de novo review. Metropolitan Sports Facilities Comm’n v. County of Hennepin, 561 N.W.2d 513, 515 (Minn. 1997). The object of statutory interpretation is to determine and give effect to the legislature’s intent. Minn.Stat. § 645.16 (1996). When the words in a statute are clear and unambiguous, a court must give effect to the plain meaning of the language. Tuma v. Commissioner of Econ. Sec., 386 N.W.2d 702, 706 (Minn.1986). If a statute is ambiguous, the legislature’s intent must be determined by examining the need for the law, the circumstances of its enactment, the mischief to be remedied, the purpose of the statute, the prior law, if any, the consequences of an interpretation, the legislative history, and the legislative and administrative interpretations of the law. Minn.Stat. § 645.16. Minn.Stat. § 566.03 (1996) provides: