Please visit my author page at amazon.com
Save Lake Calhoun v. Sarah Strommen, et al.. MN geographic names
On Januuary 18, 2018, after a contentious process, the Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources changed the name of a Minneapolis lake from "Lake Calhoun" to "Bde Maka Ska." A group of local residents objected, and brought an action for writ of quo warranto in Ramsey County District Court, which denied the request. The residents appealed to the Minnesota Court of Appeals, which reversed. Save Lake Calhoun v. Strommen, 928 N.W.2d 377 (Minn. Ct. App. 2019). The case then headed to the Minnesota Supreme Court which, on May 13, 2020, held that the DNR had the power to change the name and reversed the Court of Appeals.
The court first agreed with the Court of Appeals that quo warranto was the proper remedy. Even though there was no allegation of "misconduct" by a state officer, the question presented was whether that officer possessed the power claimed. Furthermore, the case was not moot, since the action of assigning the new name was ongoing. The Court then turned to the merits, and held that the DNR had acted within its authority. The case was one of statutory construction of Chapter 83A of the Minnesota Statutes a portion of which states that a name could not be changed after it had been in use for more than 40 years. Since the "Calhoun" name had been in use since the 1800s, the 40-year rule was applicable. However, the high court noted that the 40-year provision applied to name changes "under the provisions of sections 83A.05 to 83A.07." Those portions of the statute addressed changes by a county board, which would then need to be approved by the DNR. Indeed, in this case, the Hennepin County Board had declined to change the name because of that provision. But the Supreme Court concluded that action by the DNR commissioner was distinct from thos provisions. Even though section 82A.02(3) stated that the commissioner should act "in cooperation with the county boards and with their approval," the court concluded that the statute actually specified two mechanisms for name change. It called these the "county board process" and the "Commissioner process" under section 83A.02, which gave the Commissioner this power, independent of the county board. It held that the 40-year provision applied only to the county board process, and not the Commissioner process. Therefore, it upheld the change and reversed the Court of Appeals. The court's opinion was penned by Justice Lillehaug. Chief Justice Gildea and Justice Anderson dissented.No. A18-1007 (Minn. May 13, 2020).
Please see the original opinion for the court's exact language.
Advertisement:
Richard P. Clem is an attorney and continuing legal education (CLE) provider in Minnesota. He has been in private practice in the Twin Cities for 25 years. He has a J.D., cum laude, from Hamline University School of Law in St. Paul and a B.A. in History from the University of Minnesota. His reported cases include: Asociacion Nacional de Pescadores a Pequena Escala o Artesanales de Colombia v. Dow Quimica de Colombia, 988 F.2d 559, rehearing denied, 5 F.3d 530 (5th Cir. 1993), cert. denied, 510 U.S. 1041 (1994); LaMott v. Apple Valley Health Care Center, 465 N.W.2d 585 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991); Abo el Ela v. State, 468 N.W.2d 580 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991).
For more information about attorney Clem, please visit
his website.
For more information about his low-cost CLE programs, please visit his CLE page.
Return to index of case summaries
Copyright 2020, Richard P. Clem.
Attorney Richard P. Clem is responsible for the content of this page.
Richard P. Clem, Attorney
PO Box 14957
Minneapolis, MN 55414
USA
Phone: +1-612-378-7751
e-mail: clem.law@usa.net
Minnesota Attorney Registration Number 0192648
Please visit my author page at amazon.com