Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

Minn. Stat. § 645.26

IRRECONCILABLE PROVISIONS.

Applied in 191 court decisions — leading case Barton v. Moore (1997)

Most recently applied in Lorenzo Reed v. Westgate Investments, Inc. (May 2024)

1941 c 492 s 26

How often courts cite this section

198019902000201020202024140
citing decisions per year

Court decisions citing this, by year. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.

Subdivision 1. Particular controls general.

When a general provision in a law is in conflict with a special provision in the same or another law, the two shall be construed, if possible, so that effect may be given to both. If the conflict between the two provisions be irreconcilable, the special provision shall prevail and shall be construed as an exception to the general provision, unless the general provision shall be enacted at a later session and it shall be the manifest intention of the legislature that such general provision shall prevail.

Subd. 2. Clauses in same law.

When, in the same law, several clauses are irreconcilable, the clause last in order of date or position shall prevail.

Subd. 3. Laws passed at same session.

When the provisions of two or more laws passed during the same session of the legislature are irreconcilable, the law latest in date of final enactment, irrespective of its effective date, shall prevail from the time it becomes effective, except as otherwise provided in section 645.30 .

Subd. 4. Laws passed at different sessions.

When the provisions of two or more laws passed at different sessions of the legislature are irreconcilable, the law latest in date of final enactment shall prevail.

Official source: Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes. Reproduced from public-domain Minnesota statutes; confirm against the official source for the current text. Not legal advice.