=====================================================
630116405.fdg.doc         Campaign Complaint Findings  More;
=====================================================
...   Page  1
  Respondent Williams made an illegal campaign expenditure that violated the
  prohibition against bribery when he donated 30 chicken dinners and 24 cans
  of soda to the residents of a senior high rise located in Columbia Heights;
...
  contained a false statement; (2) that Respondent Williams made an illegal
  campaign expenditure that violated the prohibition against bribery when he
  arranged for the donation of 30 chicken dinners and 24 cans of soft drinks
...
> The Complainants argue that Respondent Williams’ donation of chicken
  dinners to the residents of Park Villa amounted to bribery or “treating”
  in violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.13.  Complainants contend that by
...
  person in order to induce him to vote in a particular way, has violated
  the prohibition against bribery.  Thus, it is not necessary for
  Complainants to show that Williams himself delivered the chicken dinners

============================================
638517049.fdg.rt.doc         4-6385-17049-CV   More;
============================================
...   Page  1
  211B.13, which prohibits bribing persons to induce them to vote in a
  particular way, defines “bribery” in part as the giving of money, food,
  entertainment or other thing of monetary value.  If Mr. Nyberg offered to

===================================================
637217578.probcause.ord.doc         8-6372-17578-CV  More;
===================================================
...   Page  1
> These facts fall short of stating a violation of the state campaign
  bribery laws, or a claim that should oblige Mr. Evens to appear at a
  hearing on the merits.  For all of these reasons, the complaint in this

=================================================================
630216119.reconsid.ord.doc         No prima facie violation found  More;
=================================================================
...   Page  1
  Stat. § 211B.04, governing disclaimers on campaign literature, and Minn.
  Stat. § 211B.13, governing bribery related to throwing candy at local
  parades.
...
  cause the allegation that Mr. Knutson violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.13,
  governing bribery.  On September 1, 2004, complainant Terry A. Kalil
  requested reconsideration of the August 31, 2004, Order as it relates to
...
  assigned administrative law judge made a “clear error of law”.
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.13, subd.1, defines bribery in relevant part as follows:
> A person who willfully, directly or indirectly, advances, pays, gives,
...
  the tossing of “penny candy” to the crowds along the parade routes is
  conduct amounting to bribery and prohibited under Minn. Stat. § 211B.13.
> It is a question of fact whether a thing given by a candidate is an object
...
  of its intent, allows for such an obvious exception as presented here.
> The order dismissing the allegation related to the bribery provision was
  not erroneous.  The petition for reconsideration is denied.

================================================
630216119.Prob.Cause.doc         3-6302-16119-CV  More;
================================================
...   Page  1
 
>      With regard to the allegation concerning bribery (throwing candy from
  the truck), the statute provides in relevant part as follows:
 
> Bribery, advancing money, and treating prohibited.  A person who willfully,
  directly or indirectly, advances, pays, gives, promises, or lends any
...
>      Mr. Knutson contends that tossing penny candy to children from a
  float in a parade cannot constitute bribery by any definition.  Ms. Kalil
  does not claim that the candy tossed by Mr. Knutson’s family has any

========================================================
630216119.ord.doc         No prima facie violation found  More;
========================================================
...   Page  1
> On September 1, 2004, Ms. Kalil filed a petition for reconsideration with
  respect to the bribery allegation.  In an Order dated September 2, 2004,
  Chief Administrative Law Judge Raymond Krause upheld Judge Sheehy’s ruling
  and found that her order dismissing the bribery allegation was not
  erroneous.

=====================================================
032017816.primafacie.ord.doc         12-0320-17816-CV  More;
=====================================================
...   Page  1
  Statutes
  §§ 211B.06 (false campaign material) and 211B.13 (bribery, treating or
  solicitation).  The Chief Administrative Law Judge assigned this matter to
...
  Law Judge concludes that the giving of the pens, pencils and rulers to
  voters did not amount to bribery or the type of conduct meant to be
  prohibited by this statute.  Accordingly, the allegation that Mr. Melbye

====================================================
032017816.dismissal.ord.doc         12-0320-17816-CV  More;
====================================================
...   Page  1
  Statutes
  §§ 211B.06 (false campaign material) and 211B.13 (bribery, treating or
  solicitation).  By Order dated January 25, 2007, the Administrative Law

============================================================
032016056.or.NoPF.doc         No prima facie violation found  More;
============================================================
...   Page  1
>  The statute provides:
>      211B.13 Bribery, treating, and solicitation.
>     Subdivision 1.    Bribery, advancing money, and treating prohibited.
  A person who willfully, directly or indirectly, advances, pays, gives,

============================================================
032016056.NoPF-OR.doc         No prima facie violation found  More;
============================================================
...   Page  1
>  The statute provides:
>      211B.13 Bribery, treating, and solicitation.
>     Subdivision 1.    Bribery, advancing money, and treating prohibited.
  A person who willfully, directly or indirectly, advances, pays, gives,

	 



====================================================
630116405.primafacie.doc         Prima Facie Finding   More; 

====================================================
...   Page  1
> The Complainants allege next that Respondents violated Minn. Stat. §§ 211B.
  12 and 211B.13 by delivering fried chicken and soft drinks to a senior
  high rise located in Columbia Heights, which they visited as part of their
...
> If the evidence at a hearing were to establish that the Respondents did
  provide the chicken dinners to the seniors in order to induce them to vote
  for the Respondents, and that the value of the food was more than “nominal

=====================================================
630116405.fdg.doc         Campaign Complaint Findings   More; 

=====================================================
...   Page  1
> Did Respondent Williams violate Minn. Stat. § 211B.13 by arranging for the
  donation of chicken dinners and soft drinks to the residents of a Columbia
  Heights high-rise on October 30, 2004?
> Was Respondent Williams’ promise to arrange for the delivery of the
  chicken dinners permitted under Minn. Stat. § 211B.12?
> Did both Respondents violate Minn. Stat. § 211A.02, by failing to report
...
  Respondent Williams made an illegal campaign expenditure that violated the
  prohibition against bribery when he donated 30 chicken dinners and 24 cans
  of soda to the residents of a senior high rise located in Columbia Heights;

===================================================
637217578.probcause.ord.doc         8-6372-17578-CV   More; 

===================================================
...   Page  1
>   Compare, Wyckoff v. Peterson, OAH Docket No. 7-6301-16405-CV (2005) (the
  provision of 20 chicken dinners on the evening following a “meet the
  candidates” forum, and three days before the election, violated section

=====================================================
032017816.primafacie.ord.doc         12-0320-17816-CV    More; 

=====================================================
...   Page  1
  with the candidate’s name and office did not violate Minn. Stat. § 211B.13,
  but that providing chicken dinners to residents at a senior housing
  complex after a candidates’ forum did violate Minn. Stat. § 211B.13.

=============================================
032017428.DISM.OR.doc         1-0320-17248-CV  More; 

=============================================
...   Page  1
  16405-CV (Order dated April 25, 2005) (Candidate violated Minn. Stat. §
  211B.13 by donating chicken dinners and soft drinks to senior apartment
  complex following his campaign visit there.)

	 



====================================================
636117155.primafacie.ord.doc         3-6326-16253-CV  More;
====================================================
...   Page  1
  Law Judge concludes that the Complainant has failed to make a prima facie
  showing that MFA knowingly received a prohibited corporate contribution
  from Respondent Hjelle & Associates, Inc.  This allegation as to

================================================
636117155.limine.OR.doc         11-6361-17155-CV  More;
================================================
...   Page  1
  and a prima facie violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.15 on the part of
  Respondent Hjelle & Associates for allegedly making a corporate
  contribution to Hjelle’s campaign.  Judge Neilson dismissed all of the
  other allegations in the Complaint and also dismissed the Maplewood

=============================================
636117155.fdg.rt.doc         11-6361-17155-CV  More;
=============================================
...   Page  1
  and a prima facie violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.15 on the part of
  Respondent Hjelle & Associates for allegedly making a corporate
  contribution to Hjelle’s campaign.  Judge Neilson dismissed all of the
  other allegations in the Complaint and also dismissed the Maplewood
...
  September 2, 2005.  In addition, Respondent Hjelle’s attempt to correct
  his insurance company’s prohibited corporate contribution of $1,423.91 for
  the lawn signs by exchanging its check for a check from the Maplewood
...
  decided to impose on Respondent Hjelle a civil penalty of $500.  The panel
  concludes that Respondent Hjelle’s violations of the contribution limits
  and the prohibition against accepting corporate contributions was
  negligent and was the result of his failure to learn the requirements of

============================================
636116947.PF.ORD.doc         7-6361-16947-CV  More;
============================================
...   Page  1
  violation of Minn. Stat. § 211A.01, subds. 1 and 2, and;
> the Maplewood Firefighters Assoc. made a corporate contribution in
  violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.15, subd. 2.

============================================
636116947.fdg.rt.doc         7-6361-16947-CV  More;
============================================
...   Page  1
  activities in this state.”
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.15, subd. 15, provides an exemption to the corporate
  contribution prohibition for a nonprofit corporation that:
> (1) is not organized or operating for the principal purpose of conducting
...
  Hjelle & Associates, Inc. for the cost of the signs does not change the
  fact that MFA initially accepted a corporate contribution.
> After reviewing the record and the submissions of the parties, the panel
  concludes that MFA does fall within the nonprofit corporation exemption to
  the corporate contribution prohibition provided by Minn. Stat. § 211B.15,
  subd. 15.  With respect to the first exemption criteria, the panel finds
...
  before the panel in this matter is whether MFA meets the express exemption
  to the corporate contribution prohibition allowed for non-profit
  corporations under subdivision 15.  The panel concludes that MFA meets the
...
  violated the $300 contribution limit set forth at Minn. Stat. § 211A.12.
  Although MFA is exempted from the corporate contribution prohibition of
  Minn. Stat. § 211B.15, it is still subject to the contribution limitations
...
  636.65 for printing of campaign material.  However, with respect to its
  prohibited corporate contribution claim, the Complaint alleged only that
  MFA violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.15 by making a corporate contribution.
  There was no allegation that Erik Hjelle & Associates, Inc. violated Minn.
  Stat. § 211B.15 by making a corporate contribution and Hjelle & Associates,
  Inc. was not named as a party.  Likewise, Complainant’s motion to amend

==============================================================
635416181.order-finding-PF.doc         032016053.or finding pf  More;
==============================================================
...   Page  1
  particular, the posting of a link to a candidate’s website on the
  Respondent’s website may constitute a prohibited corporate political
  contribution.
> THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that this

===============================================
630617628.dismissal.doc         3-6306-17628-CV  More;
===============================================
...   Page  1
> Based on the allegations of the Complaint, the Administrative Law Judge
  cannot conclude that a corporation or corporate employee has made a
  contribution of property or other thing of monetary value to promote Mr.
  Erichsrud’s election to office.  The Complaint is dismissed because it

============================================================
630119262.dism.or.doc         OAH Docket No. 8-6301-19262-CV  More;
============================================================
...   Page  1
 
> Mr. Wenzel’s argument is two-fold: Namely, that Minnesota’s corporate
  contribution ban should be understood to apply to any organizational
  entity that undertakes not-for-profit activities, and further that the ban

===================================================================
630119262 primafacie-odr.doc         OAH Docket No. 8-6301-19262-CV  More;
===================================================================
...   Page  1
 
> Corporate Contribution by District Council 82
> The Complaint alleges that District Council 82 is a corporation and
...
 
> Corporate Contribution by Local 61
> The Complaint alleges that the telephone number listed on Harder’s website

==============================================
032017641.DISM.OR.doc         15-0320-17641-CV  More;
==============================================
...   Page  1
  in the creation and preparation of the campaign flyer.
> Prohibited corporate contribution allegation
>      Minn. Stat. § 211B.15 applies to for-profit corporations, nonprofit
...
  money, property, service, or other things of monetary value to promote or
  defeat a candidate’s election to office.  Therefore, the corporate
  contribution allegations in the Complaint are dismissed for failure to
  allege prima facie violations of Minn. Stat. § 211B.15, subd. 2 and 4.

=============================================
032017509.rt.mbg.doc         11-0320-17509-CV  More;
=============================================
...   Page  1
  making contributions to candidates or their committees.
> Senator Jungbauer never asked Mr. Hayes to make a corporate contribution
  and not until approximately September 7, 2006, was he aware that Mr. Hayes
...
  program was that the campaign finance report had listed receipt of a $600
  corporate contribution.  Ms. Olson called Senator Jungbauer and informed
  him that the campaign report software had indicated receipt of a
  prohibited corporate contribution.  Because the report was due that same
  day, Senator Jungbauer directed Ms. Olson to go ahead and submit the
  report electronically.  He did not review the report, but assumed that the
  corporate contribution receipt flagged by the software was simply the
  result of an error made in entering the data.  Because the report asks for
...
  staff person at the Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board informing
  him of problems with the report, including the receipt of a corporate
  contribution from Anoka Air Charter, Inc.  Senator Jungbauer informed the
  Board staff person that he would look into the identified problems,
  including the corporate contribution.
> On September 7, 2006, Senator Jungbauer obtained and reviewed a copy of
...
  and told him that he would reimburse Anoka Air Charter for its
  contribution since corporate contributions are prohibited under Minnesota
  law.  Senator Jungbauer wrote out a check for $600 from his campaign
...
  Stat. § 211B.15, subd. 13, or that the Respondent knowingly solicited or
  received the corporate contribution in violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.13,
  subd. 2.  There was no credible evidence that the Respondent solicited a
  corporate contribution or had any knowledge that one may have been made
  until the August 2006 financial report was prepared.  Once alerted to the
  possibility that the campaign had received a corporate contribution, the
  Respondent obtained a copy of the check and, upon seeing it, immediately

=================================================
032017509.Prob.Cause.doc         11-0320-17509-CV  More;
=================================================
...   Page  1
  personal donation from Mike Hayes and his wife, the owners of Anoka Air
  Charters, and not a corporate contribution.  In a September 15, 2006,
  article that appeared in “Hometown Source,” an on-line political
...
> Respondent argues that the allegation that he violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  15 should be dismissed for lack of probable cause because the corporate
  contribution prohibition contained in Subdivision 2 simply prohibits
  corporations from making contributions, and does not make it a violation
...
  asserts that the Complainant cannot show that he in any way aided and
  abetted the corporate contribution under subdivision 13 because Respondent
  maintains he had no knowledge of the contribution and did not participate
...
  211B.15, subd. 13, and § 211B.12(7).  Whether the Respondent aided or
  abetted the prohibited corporate contribution from Anoka Air Charter Inc.,
  and whether Respondent simply made reporting errors and mischaracterized


    

	 


===========================================
638517588.disor.doc         8-6385-17588-CV  More;
===========================================
...   Page  1
  before November 6, 2006 without paying an additional filing fee.
> That the Complaint that the flyer does not contain the disclaimer required
  by Minn. Stat. § 211B.04 is DISMISSED.
...
  Minn. Stat. § 211B.06.  The Complaint also alleged that the flyer does not
  contain the disclaimer required by Minn. Stat. § 211B.04.  The page, title “
  Re-elect the ‘Good-ol-boys’ to City Council?” contains 10 bullet point
...
  this subsequent complaint is filed on or before November 6, 2006.
> The Complaint also alleges that the flyer does not contain the disclaimer
  required by Minn. Stat. 211B.04.  On April 26, 2006, the Minnesota Court
  of Appeals issued its decision in Riley v. Jankowski, holding that the
  disclaimer requirement of Minn. Stat. § 211B.04 violates the First
  Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  Because the Minnesota Court of
  Appeals has determined that Minn. Stat. § 211B.04 is unconstitutional on
  its face, it is not otherwise enforceable.  The Complainant’s allegation

====================================================
637817388.primafacie.ord.doc         3-6378-17388-CV  More;
====================================================
...   Page  1
  211B.04 and 211B.06 by preparing and disseminating false campaign material
  that lacked a disclaimer.  After reviewing the Complaint and attached
  exhibits, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge has determined that the
...
  .  The Complainant alleges that on or about April 26, 2006, the Respondent
  distributed campaign material that lacked a disclaimer in violation of
  Minn. Stat. § 211B.04, and violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 by containing
...
> On April 26, 2006, the Minnesota Court of Appeals issued its decision in
  Riley v. Jankowski, holding that the disclaimer requirement of Minn. Stat
  . § 211B.04 violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by
...
  Because the Minnesota Court of Appeals has determined that Minn. Stat. §
  211B.04 is unconstitutional on its face, the Complainant’s allegation that
  the campaign material violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.04 is dismissed.

=============================================
632917227.DISM.OR.doc         3-6329-17227-CV  More;
=============================================
...   Page  1
  violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.04 by preparing and/or disseminating campaign
  material without a disclaimer in the form required by Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  04.  After reviewing the Complaint and attached exhibit, the undersigned
...
> On April 26, 2006, the Minnesota Court of Appeals issued its decision in
  Riley v. Jankowski, holding that the disclaimer requirement of Minn. Stat
  .           § 211B.04 violates the First Amendment of the U.S.
...
  constitutional violation.  Because the Minnesota Court of Appeals has
  determined that Minn. Stat. § 211B.04 is unconstitutional on its face, the
  Complaint must be dismissed.

=========================================
632617627.or.doc         15-6326-17627-CV  More;
=========================================
...   Page  1
  violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.02, and these allegations are dismissed.
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.04 (disclaimer)
>      The Complainant claims in allegations 1, 2, 3, 5 and 7 that several
...
  Minn. Stat. § 211B.04.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals recently ruled,
  however, that the disclaimer requirement contained in Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  04 is unconstitutional on its face.  The Court held that the Section 211B.
  04’s disclaimer requirement violates the First Amendment of the U.S.
  Constitution by directly regulating the content of pure speech and that

====================================================
632617585 primafacie ord.doc         8-6326-17585-CV  More;
====================================================
...   Page  1
  newspaper, magazine, or periodical a political advertisement unless the
  words "PAID ADVERTISEMENT,” and the disclaimer required under section 211B.
  04 are included at the beginning or end of the advertisement.  The
  disclaimer must be in a legible text size and font.  A radio station,
  television station, or cable system may not accept for broadcast a
...
  not a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.06.  Moreover, even if this
  allegation was more accurately identified as a violation of the disclaimer
  requirement of Minn. Stat. § 211B.04, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled
  recently that Minn. Stat. § 211B.04 is unconstitutional on its face.  This
  allegation is dismissed.

====================================================
631217667.primafacie.ord.doc         8-6312-17667-CV  More;
====================================================
...   Page  1
  Administrative Hearings alleging that Ted Phillips violated Minnesota
  Statutes §§ 211B.02 (false claim of support), 211B.04 (improper disclaimer
  ), 211B.06 (false campaign material) and 211B.07 (undue influence on
...
> The Complaint alleges that Mr. Phillips violated Minnesota Statutes § 211B.
  04 by failing to include a disclaimer on any of the three campaign flyers.
  Minnesota Statutes § 211B.04 requires most campaign material to include a
  disclaimer substantially in the form provided in subdivision (b).
> However, earlier this year, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled that the
  disclaimer requirement of Minnesota Statutes § 211B.04 violates the First
  Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  The Court of Appeals held that the
  disclaimer requirement directly regulated the content of pure speech and
  that there was no way to narrowly construe the statute so as to avoid this
  constitutional violation.  Because the Minnesota Court of Appeals has
  determined that Minnesota Statutes § 211B.04 is unconstitutional on its
  face, and therefore unenforceable, Mr. Menne’s allegation that Mr.

===============================================
631217591.dismissal.doc         3-6312-17591-CV More;
===============================================
...   Page  1
  by name and telephone number, violates 211B.04 because it contains no
  disclaimer and is a conflict of interest.
 
...
  and sewer rates, cash on hand, tax cuts, and zoning.  At the bottom of
  each page is the disclaimer “Paid for by the Committee to Re-Elect Rick
  Smisson for Mayor   Harris, MN.”
...
> The Complaint alleges that this document violates Minn. Stat. § 211B.04
  because it does not include a disclaimer that it is being circulated to
  support the Respondents.  Even assuming that this document was prepared on
  behalf of the Respondents, the Minnesota Court of Appeals recently ruled
  that the disclaimer requirement contained in Minn. Stat. § 211B.04 is
  unconstitutional on its face.  This allegation is also dismissed.
> Finally, the Complaint alleges that in addition to violating the
  disclaimer requirement of § 211B.04, the document above “is a direct
  conflict of interest of using city assets to promote their further

========================================================
630216119.ord.doc         No prima facie violation found  More;
========================================================
...   Page  1
  signs and stands.
> Mr. Knutson did not include on the signs a disclaimer identifying the name
  and address of the person who paid for the signs.
...
  Administrative Hearings alleging that Mr. Knutson violated Minn. Stat. §
  211B.04, by failing to have a disclaimer on his signs, and Minn. Stat. §
  211B.13, by giving out candy at the two parades.
...
> By Order dated August 31, 2004, Judge Sheehy found probable cause to
  believe Mr. Knutson violated the disclaimer requirements of Minn. Stat. §
  211B.04, with respect to his signs.  Judge Sheehy, however, found no
...
  committee causing the material to be prepared or disseminated in a
  disclaimer substantially in the form provided in paragraph (b) or (c) is
  guilty of a misdemeanor.
> (b) Except in cases covered by paragraph (c), the required form of
  disclaimer is:  "Prepared and paid for by the .......... committee
  , .........(address)" for material prepared and paid for by a principal
...
  committee other than a principal campaign committee.
> (c) In the case of broadcast media, the required form of disclaimer is:  "
  Paid for by the ............ committee."
> (d) Campaign material that is not circulated on behalf of a particular
  candidate or ballot question must also include in the disclaimer either
  that it is "in opposition to .....(insert name of candidate or ballot
...
> Mr. Knutson violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.04(a) and (b) by failing to have
  the required disclaimer on his signs.
> Pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 211B.35, subd. 2, the panel of Administrative
...
> That Respondent remove his lawn signs or bring them into compliance by
  adding the disclaimer required under Minn. Stat. § 211B.04, by Monday,
  September 13, 2004.
...
  the news media.”  Campaign material is required, under Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  04(a) and (b), to include a disclaimer identifying the name and address of
  the person or committee that prepared or disseminated the material.
...
  at issue in this case and that he inadvertently failed to include a
  disclaimer.  At the probable cause hearing, he argued nonetheless that his
  signs are “objects” within the meaning of § 211B.04(e) that do not require
  a disclaimer.  Under the statute, objects “stating only the candidate’s
  name and the office sought” do not require a disclaimer.  Mr. Knutson’s
  signs contain more than the candidate’s name and office sought.  The signs
...
> Mr. Knutson also argued that because he spent less than $500 on the signs,
  he is not required to use the disclaimer under section 211B.04(f).
  Subsection (f), however, does not apply to Mr. Knutson because it concerns
...
  District Court for the District of Minnesota recently declared the
  disclaimer requirements of Minn. Stat. § 211B.04 (2003) to be a facial
  violation of the First Amendment and has enjoined the state from enforcing
...
  Kelley, the federal court focused on Minn. Stat. § 211B.04(f) as it
  relates to anonymous pamphleteering and found that the disclaimer
  requirement directly attacks core political speech “unsupported by an
...
  appearance of corruption” if their activities are not disclosed,
  Minnesota’s disclaimer requirement “rests on different and less powerful
  state interests,” such as ensuring responsible campaigning.  With no
  overriding interest supporting the statute, the court found that Minn.
  Stat. § 211B.04 was unconstitutional under the First Amendment.
> The state did not appeal that decision.  The legislature amended section
...
  legislature’s amendments to the statute in direct response to the decision,
  the panel finds that the disclaimer requirements of Minn. Stat. § 211B.04(
  a) and (b) are valid and apply to Mr. Knutson.  Accordingly, Mr. Knutson
  is ordered to remove the lawn signs or to bring them into compliance with
  Minn. Stat. § 211B.04 by affixing the appropriate disclaimer.  In addition,
  Mr. Knutson is ordered to pay a civil penalty of $100.  The panel finds
  this amount to be reasonable and appropriate.  Mr. Knutson’s failure to
  include the disclaimer on his signs was due to inadvertence and was not a
  deliberate attempt to mislead the public or circumvent the law.  In
  addition, Mr. Knutson has indicated a willingness to remedy the problem
  and he already has taken steps to add the disclaimer to his signs and
  other campaign material.
...
  additional information that Mr. Knutson’s printed campaign flyers did not
  include the required disclaimer.  In a letter to the panel dated September
  6, 2004, Mr. Knutson stated that he has since handwritten the required
  disclaimer on the back of his flyers.  The flyers were not addressed at
  the probable cause hearing, and will not be addressed here.
...
>  In addition, Administrative Law Judges lack jurisdiction to declare a
  statute facially unconstitutional.  See, Neeland v. Clearwater Memorial
  Hospital, 257 N.W.2d 366, 369 (Minn.1977); In re Rochester Ambulance

==============================================
032017434.DISM.OR.doc         11-0320-17434-CV  More;
==============================================
...   Page  1
  at a primary or other election.  The Complaint alleges that Ms. Sampson
  violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.04 by failing to include a disclaimer on the
  web page identifying herself as the person “running the site.”
> On April 26, 2006, the Minnesota Court of Appeals issued its decision in
  Riley v. Jankowski, holding that the disclaimer requirement of Minn. Stat
  . § 211B.04 violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by
...
  Because the Minnesota Court of Appeals has determined that Minn. Stat. §
  211B.04 is unconstitutional on its face, the Complainant’s allegation that
  Ms. Sampson violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.04 is dismissed.

=========================================
032016234.fdg.doc         032016234.order  More;
=========================================
...   Page  1
  a two-sided flyer that was mailed by Respondent’s staff to many of
  households in the District.  The disclaimer on the flyer states that it
  was paid for by Bataglia for Congress.  That is Respondent’s campaign
...
> Respondent argues that Minn. Stat. §§ 211B.06 and 211B.32-211B.36 are
  unconstitutional in several regards.  Administrative Law Judges lack
  authority to declare a statute unconstitutional on its face and no
  determination is made on the argument.  In applying Minn. Stat. § 211B.06,





	   

	 




==========================================================
638519351.DISM.OR.doc         Campaign Complaint Dismissal  More;
==========================================================
...   Page  1
  Stat. § 211B.11, subd. 1.  This provision prohibits the display of
  campaign materials at or near the polling place on election day.
> The Chief Administrative Law Judge assigned this matter to the undersigned
...
>      Minn. Stat. § 211B.11 prohibits the display of campaign materials or
  the solicitation of voters at or near the polling place on election day.
  Section 211B.11, subd. 1, provides in part:
...
  polling place is situated, or anywhere on the public property on which a
  polling place is situated, on primary or election day to vote for or
  refrain from voting for a candidate or ballot question.
...
  provision prohibits the display of campaign material or the solicitation
  of voters to vote a certain way at or near the polling place on election
  day.  The sign posted outside the school did not advocate voting either
  for or against the ballot question.  Rather the sign merely encouraged the

=============================================
636117234.DISM.OR.doc         4-6361-17234-CV  More;
=============================================
...   Page  1
  displaying of campaign material or solicitation of voters at or near the
  polling place on election day.
> The Chief Administrative Law Judge assigned this matter to the undersigned
...
  City Council.  In addition to the City Council election, there was also a
  school board election in Falcon Heights on November 8, 2005.  On election
  day, the Complainant and others observed several incidents at the City’s
  two polling places that the Complaint alleges violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.
...
  elected to the City Council.
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.11 governs election day prohibitions.  Subdivision 1 of
  this section provides as follows:
...
  induce or persuade a voter within a polling place or within 100 feet of
  the building in which a polling place is situated, on primary or election
  day to vote for or refrain from voting for a candidate or ballot question.
  A person may not provide political badges, political buttons, or other
...
  political insignia may not be worn at or about the polling place on
  primary or election day.  This section applies to areas established by the
  county auditor or municipal clerk for absentee voting as provided in
...
  displaying campaign material or soliciting voters to vote a certain way at
  or near a polling place on election day.  An election judge responding to
  a voter’s request for the spelling of the write-in candidate’s name does
...
  prohibits the displaying of campaign material at a polling place on
  election day.  A stack of newspapers in the front lobby of the city hall
  polling place is not a display of campaign material in violation of Minn.

====================================================
635817651.primafacie.ord.doc         7-6358-17651-CV  More;
====================================================
...   Page  1
  Administrative Hearings alleging that John Wagner violated Minn. Stat. §
  211B.11 (election day prohibitions).  After reviewing the Complaint and
  attached exhibits, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge has determined
...
  polling place.  According to the Complaint, Mr. Wagner remained at the
  polling place throughout election day greeting voters and chatting with
  them.  The Complaint further alleges that Mr. Wagner was overheard talking
...
  the ballots despite being a candidate.
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.11 governs election day prohibitions.  Subdivision 1 of
  this section provides as follows:
...
  induce or persuade a voter within a polling place or within 100 feet of
  the building in which a polling place is situated, on primary or election
  day to vote for or refrain from voting for a candidate or ballot question.
  A person may not provide political badges, political buttons, or other
...
  political insignia may not be worn at or about the polling place on
  primary or election day.  This section applies to areas established by the
  county auditor or municipal clerk for absentee voting as provided in

====================================================
635817651.evidentiary.or.doc         7-6358-17651-CV  More;
====================================================
...   Page  1
  Administrative Hearings alleging that John Wagner violated Minnesota
  Statutes § 211B.11 (election day prohibitions).  Administrative Law Judge
  Richard Luis reviewed the complaint and determined by Order dated

=============================================
631117633.DISM.OR.doc         4-6311-17633-CV  More;
=============================================
...   Page  1
  prohibits the provision or wearing or political badges or buttons at or
  about the polling place on primary or election day.  The Complainant has
  failed to allege any facts to support finding that the Respondent violated
...
  mingling” with voters.  It prohibits soliciting at or near polling places
  on primary or election day.  The Complaint has failed to allege a prima
  facie violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.11 and this allegation is dismissed.

=====================================================
631017664.primafacie.ord.doc         11-6310-17664-CV  More;
=====================================================
...   Page  1
  Administrative Hearings alleging that Wayne LaDuke violated Minn. Stat. §
  211B.11 (election day prohibitions).  After reviewing the Complaint and
  attached exhibits, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge has determined
...
  place.
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.11 governs election day prohibitions.  Subdivision 1 of
  this section provides as follows:
...
  induce or persuade a voter within a polling place or within 100 feet of
  the building in which a polling place is situated, on primary or election
  day to vote for or refrain from voting for a candidate or ballot question.
  A person may not provide political badges, political buttons, or other
...
  political insignia may not be worn at or about the polling place on
  primary or election day.  This section applies to areas established by the
  county auditor or municipal clerk for absentee voting as provided in

=========================================
032016264.fdg.doc         7-0320-16264-CV  More;
=========================================
...   Page  1
  standard mail and be guaranteed to be delivered before November 2,
  election day.  October 28 was the last day that campaign pieces could be
  mailed by first-class mail and meet the delivery deadline.

	 


=====================================================
032521005.primafacie ord.doc         11-0325-21005-CV                  More; 
=====================================================
...   Page  1
  Minnesota Statutes
  §§ 211B.02 (false endorsement) and 211B.06 (false campaign material) in
  connection with her campaign for the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board
...
  interview with the Star Tribune Editorial Board, Ms. Forney falsely stated
  in her closing remarks that she had the endorsement of Mayor R.T. Rybak,
  State Senator Scott Dibble and the Minneapolis Professional Employees
...
  Bourn on September 25, 2009.  The Complainant alleges that these claims of
  endorsement were false and that, by making these statements, Ms. Forney
  violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.02.
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.  A person or candidate may not state in written campaign
  material that the candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of an individual without first getting written permission from
  the individual to do so.
...
  . § 211B.02 with respect to Respondent’s alleged false claims of
  endorsement and support listed on Ms. Forney’s campaign website in July
  2009.  This allegation will proceed to an evidentiary hearing.
...
  Judge finds that Ms. Forney’s alleged statement to the board that she had
  the support or endorsement of Mayor Rybak and Senator Dibble cannot form
  the basis of a Minn. Stat. § 211B.02 claim.  The portion of § 211B.02
  relating to false claims of endorsement by individuals only prohibits
  candidates from stating in written campaign material that they have the
  support or endorsement of an individual without first getting written
  permission to do so.  Oral statements by a candidate that they have the
  support or endorsement of certain individuals therefore are not within the
  purview of Minn. Stat. § 211B.02.  Consequently, this allegation is
  dismissed.
> However, § 211B.02 more broadly prohibits false claims of endorsement by
  organizations, such as the MPEA.  Minn. Stat. § 211B.02 specifies that
  candidates may not falsely state or imply that they have the endorsement
  of an organization without limiting this prohibition to written campaign
  material.  Accordingly, the allegation concerning Ms. Forney’s alleged
  statement to the Star Tribune Editorial Board that she had the endorsement
  of the MPEA will proceed to hearing.




============================================
032520939rt.doc         OAH  3-0325-20939-CV                     More; 
============================================
...   Page  1
  of Administrative Hearings alleging that the Respondent had violated Minn.
  Stat. § 211B.02 based on the claimed endorsement of the League of Women
  Voters in the first postcard mailed by the Respondent.  On November 2,
...
> Claimed Endorsement by the DFL
> In the postcard and flyer distributed before the election, the Respondent
...
  ballot question can vote to support a local ballot question.  The DFL
  treats the endorsement of a ballot question similarly to the endorsement
  of a candidate.  To obtain an endorsement, a ballot question needs 60% of
  the vote of the competent endorsing body.  Only the St. Paul DFL had the
  authority to take a position on the St. Paul ballot question.

> After the postcard and flyer were mailed, several persons objected to the
  claimed endorsement by the DFL.  In response to questions posed by Jeanne
  Massey and Kathleen Murphy, Mr. Melendez notified them on October 31, 2009,
  that the claimed endorsement by the DFL was false:
> While the Party’s platform generally supports the adoption of instant-
...
  then you are on solid ground.  But if the statement is paraphrased or
  truncated in any way that states or implies endorsement of this particular
  ballot question, then the claim becomes misleading or false.
> Claimed Endorsement by the League of Women Voters
> In the postcard and flyer, Respondent stated that the St. Paul ballot
...
> On October 28, 2009, after receiving the first postcard on which
  Respondent claimed the endorsement of the LWV-SP, Sigrid Johnson, Co-
  President of the LWV-SP, and Marion Watson, League member, wrote a letter
...
> Respondent’s website was designed to allow individuals to provide
  electronic written permission to use their names as a public endorsement
  of “advanced voting methods like instant runoff voting.”
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.  A person or candidate may not state in written campaign
  material that the candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of an individual without first getting written permission from
  the individual to do so.
...
  Voters, and the St. Paul League of Women Voters.  The second is whether
  the St. Paul BBC claimed endorsement by several individuals President
  Obama, Sen. John McCain, Ralph Nader, and Cynthia McKinney without
...
 





=========================================
638517601.fdg.doc         3-6385-17601-CV   More; 
=========================================
...   Page  1
  contribution,” they intended it to mean demonstrations of public support
  for, and endorsement of, Mr. Herbst; such as statements made by Jeff Young
  in newspaper articles and letters to the editor.

====================================================
637817388.primafacie.ord.doc         3-6378-17388-CV   More; 
====================================================
...   Page  1
> The Complainant is a candidate for Senate District 28 and was seeking the
  Republican Party’s endorsement at the April 29, 2006, endorsing convention
  .  The Complainant alleges that on or about April 26, 2006, the Respondent

==============================================
637217611.DISM.OR.doc         15-6372-17611-CV   More; 
==============================================
...   Page  1
  Candidates” forum and by handing out campaign flyers at the forum, Mr.
  Carlbom falsely implied that he has the support or endorsement of the
  Democratic Party in violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.02.  According to the
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.  A person or candidate may not state in written campaign
  material that the candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of an individual without first getting written permission from
  the individual to do so.
> The statute prohibits a candidate from falsely stating or implying that he
  has the endorsement or support of a major political party.  However,
  nothing in section 211B.02 prohibits a candidate from informing voters of
...
  support finding that Mr. Carlbom falsely stated or implied he has the
  support or endorsement of the Democratic Party.  The Complaint alleges
  only that Mr. Carlbom attended a candidates’ forum sponsored by the
...
  Neither of these actions implies that Mr. Carlbom has the support or
  endorsement of the Democratic Party.  Moreover, there is no allegation
  that Mr. Carlbom prepared the advertisement that appeared in The Record,
  and there is no allegation that Mr. Carlbom’s campaign flyer states or
  implies endorsement or support by the Democratic Party.
> The Complaint is dismissed because it fails to allege a prima facie
...
  Court held that a candidate’s use of the initials “DFL” falsely implied
  that the candidate had the endorsement of the DFL party in violation of
  Minnesota election law.  There is no comparable allegation in this case.

=========================================
636119193.rt.doc         15-6361-19193-CV   More; 
=========================================
...   Page  1
  notifying her that it had received a complaint regarding her “Maplewood
  Fire” endorsement claim on her candidate profile.  In response to that
  complaint and after discussing the matter with Ms. Cave, the Star Tribune
...
>   Other candidates for Maplewood City Council listed several organizations
  in the endorsement section of the Star Tribune’s candidate profile form
  and were not limited by space restrictions.
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.
...
  . § 211B.02 by knowingly making a false claim implying that Rebecca Cave
  has the endorsement of the Maplewood Fire Department.
>   Respondent Rebecca Cave shall be fined $1,000 for the violation.
...
  may not knowingly make, directly or indirectly, a false claim stating or
  implying that a candidate has the support or endorsement of a major
  political party or party unit or of an organization.  For a violation to
  be established, the complainant must show that the respondent knowingly
  stated or implied a false claim of endorsement.  The issue before the
  panel is whether, by stating on the lawn signs and candidate profile that
...
  candidate’s use of the initials “DFL” would imply to the average voter
  that the candidate had the endorsement, or, at the very least, the support
  of the DFL party.  To hold otherwise, according to the court, would render
  the word “imply” meaningless.  Accordingly, a false implication of support
  or endorsement is as much a violation as an overtly false claim.
> Further, in determining whether the candidate’s false implication of
...
  literature falsely claimed or implied that he had party support or
  endorsement.”  In order to make this determination, the Court explained
  that the candidate’s testimony must be examined together with the
...
  Complainants presented evidence that several Maplewood residents were
  confused by the endorsement claim and interpreted the claim to mean that
  the Maplewood Fire Department had endorsed Ms. Cave.  The panel is
  persuaded that the phrase “Maplewood Fire [Endorsed]” falsely implies to
  the average Maplewood voter that the candidate had the endorsement of the
  Maplewood Fire Department or the union representing the full-time
  firefighters.  Furthermore, an endorsement by those charged with
  protecting the public is valuable precisely because it suggests some
...
  these organizations has agreed to endorse Ms. Cave.  This is a knowingly
  false claim or implication of endorsement.  Moreover, the disclaimer
  indicating that the MFA paid for the signs does not, as Hjelle argues,
...
  Maplewood Fire” on T-shirts and other apparel as the basis for believing
  that he could use the same phrase in an endorsement.  This extrapolation
  is unreasonable and illogical, as are his efforts to seek trademark
...
  prior to the primary, her dealings with the Star Tribune regarding
  correction of the endorsement listed on her candidate profile, and her new
  lawn signs reflect her awareness of the distinctions between the MFA, the
...
>  Exs. 2, 40, 41, and 43.  (At some point in time, Ms. Cave received an
  endorsement from the Maplewood Police Officer’s Union (LELS #153)).
>  Exs. 40, 43, and 44B.

=================================================
636119193.Prob.Cause.doc         15-6361-19193-CV    More; 
=================================================
...   Page  1
  per-call firefighters, and claims to have approximately 30-40 members.  Ms.
  Cave does not have the endorsement of the Maplewood Fire Department.  The
  Maplewood Fire Department does not endorse any candidate.
...
  further alleges that the Respondents knowingly made the false claim
  implying endorsement by the Maplewood Fire Department in violation of Minn.
  Stat. § 211B.02.
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.
...
  her that it too had received a complaint regarding her “Maplewood Fire”
  endorsement claim in her candidate profile.  In response to that complaint
  and after discussing the matter with Ms. Cave, the Star Tribune
...
  preparing Ms. Cave’s candidate profile.
> Unlike the phrase, “Maplewood Police,” which could suggest endorsement by
  individual police officers, the phrase “Maplewood Fire” can only refer to
...
  the complaint holding that the uniform and logo, without more, did not
  falsely imply that the candidate had the endorsement of the Brooklyn Park
  Fire Department.  Unlike that case, both Ms. Cave’s candidate profile and
...
  campaign literature that included the phrase “Police Endorsed” alongside a
  personal endorsement from the former Brooklyn Park Police Chief and an
  endorsement from the Brooklyn Park Police Federation.  Given that context,
  the Administrative Law Judge found the phrase “Police Endorsed” did not
  falsely imply endorsement of the Brooklyn Park Police Department.
>  Compare Ex. 2 with Ex. 38.

=================================================
636119193.primafacie.doc         15-6361-19193-CV     More; 
=================================================
...   Page  1
  representing Maplewood’s fire department or firefighters.  Ms. Cave does
  not have the endorsement of the Maplewood Fired Department.  The Maplewood
  Fire Department does not endorse any candidate.
...
  211B.02 by implying on both the lawn signs and the candidate profile that
  Ms. Cave has the endorsement of the Maplewood Fire Department.  (The
  Complaint makes no allegation as to whether the lawn signs or candidate
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.
...
  Fire” endorses Ms. Cave, the Respondents knowingly falsely implied that Ms.
  Cave has the endorsement of the Maplewood Fire Department.
> The Administrative Law Judge concludes that the complaint does allege

============================================
636116947.fdg.rt.doc         7-6361-16947-CV    More; 
============================================
...   Page  1
  subd. 15.  With respect to the first exemption criteria, the panel finds
  that MFA’s co-sponsorship of a charitable benefit, endorsement of
  candidates, and purchasing of campaign material is not sufficient business

=============================================
634917443.DISM.OR.doc         4-6349-17433-CV   More; 
=============================================
...   Page  1
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.  A person or candidate may not state in written campaign
  material that the candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of an individual without first getting written permission from
  the individual to do so.  [Emphasis supplied.]

=========================================
632617627.or.doc         15-6326-17627-CV   More; 
=========================================
...   Page  1
> Posted on the home page of Mayor Lampi’s campaign website, is a statement
  of personal endorsement from former Brooklyn Park Police Chief Don Davis.
  Located directly below this personal endorsement in bold typeface is the
  phrase “Police Endorsed.”  Directly below the phrase “Police Endorsed” is
...
  Endorsed,” when used in conjunction with the former police chief’s
  endorsement and the endorsement of the Police Federation, falsely implies
  that Mayor Lampi has the endorsement of the Brooklyn Park Police
  Department.  Similarly, in allegation 4, the Complainant claims that
  stickers on Mayor Lampi’s lawn signs that state “Police Endorsed” falsely
  imply endorsement of his candidacy by the Brooklyn Park Police Department
  in violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.02.  According to the Complaint, the
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.  A person or candidate may not state in written campaign
  material that the candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of an individual without first getting written permission from
  the individual to do so.
> The statute prohibits a candidate from knowingly making a false claim
  stating or implying that he or she has the endorsement or support of an
  organization. The question presented is whether the phrase “police
...
  nature of the proceedings before the Administrative Law Judge.
> Mayor Lampi has the endorsement of the Brooklyn Park Police Federation and
  former Brooklyn Park Police Chief Don Davis.  Because he has the
  endorsement of some police officers, the phrase “police endorsed” is a
  true statement.  Even when placed in close proximity to the former Police
  Chief’s personal endorsement, the phrase “police endorsed,” does not
  falsely imply that Mayor Lampi has the endorsement of the Brooklyn Park
  Police Department.  The Complainant has failed to allege a prima facie

==============================================
632617587.DISM.OR.doc         15-6326-17587-CV    More; 
==============================================
...   Page  1
  pages prepared by Jasicki for Council, violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.02, by
  falsely implying support or endorsement of the Brooklyn Park Fire
  Department and unauthorized use of its logo.  One page of the campaign
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.  A person or candidate may not state in written campaign
  material that the candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of an individual without first getting written permission from
  the individual to do so.
...
> The first sentence of this statute prohibits a candidate from falsely
  stating or implying that he has the endorsement or support of an
  organization.  The question presented is whether simply printing a fire
...
  For a firefighter to include the logo, without anything more, is
  insufficient to imply that Mr. Jasicki has the endorsement or support of
  the Brooklyn Park Fire Department.  Because the Jasicki campaign material

==============================================
632616963.DISM.OR.doc         15-6326-16963-CV   More; 
==============================================
...   Page  1
  together, the material falsely implies that Natalie Johnson Lee and Booker
  T. Hodges IV had the support or endorsement of Peter McLaughlin in
  violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.02.  The Complainant contends that “
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.  A person or candidate may not state in written campaign
  material that the candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of an individual without first getting written permission from
  the individual to do so.
> The first sentence of this statute prohibits a candidate from falsely
  stating or implying that she or he has the endorsement or support of a “
  major political party or party unit or of an organization.”  The Minnesota
...
  material at issue does not falsely state or imply that Respondents have
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or
  organization.  Thus, the first sentence of section 211B.02 does not apply
...
> The second sentence of the statute prohibits a candidate from “stating in
  written campaign material” that he or she has the support or endorsement
  of an individual without first getting permission from the individual to
...
  that the second sentence of section 211B.02 requires that the alleged
  false support or endorsement of an individual be based on an explicit
  written statement and not merely an implication.
...
  candidates from falsely stating or implying in written campaign material
  that the candidate had an individual’s support or endorsement, but it did
  not do so.

===============================================
632616931.probcause.doc         3-6326-16931-CV   More; 
===============================================
...   Page  1
  committee of Marie Hauser, Glidden’s opponent.  Neither Glidden nor Hauser
  received endorsement by the DFL party, although both are affiliated with
  the DFL.
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.  A person or candidate may not state in written campaign
  material that the candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of an individual without first getting written permission from
  the individual to do so.
...
  candidate’s use of the initials “DFL” would imply to the average voter
  that the candidate had the endorsement, or, at the very least, the support
  of the DFL party.  The court explained that candidates have a right to
...
  endorsed her or expressed support for her, she has not suggested
  endorsement by the DFL in violation of the statute.  In Ryan v. Lefebvre,
  however, in response to a candidate’s argument that he had complied with
...
  find that there is probable cause to believe that use of the initials “DFL”
  next to Glidden’s name suggests the endorsement or support of the DFL
  party in violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.02.  This matter will be referred

=========================================
632616931.fdg.doc         3-6326-16931-CV    More; 
=========================================
...   Page  1
  directly or indirectly, a false claim stating or implying Elizabeth
  Glidden has the support or endorsement of a major political party?
>      The panel concludes the Respondents did not violate Minn. Stat. §
...
  campaign material.
> 2.   Glidden and Hauser both sought endorsement of the DFL party, along
  with four other candidates.  At the Eighth Ward DFL endorsing convention
  in April or May 2005, no candidate received DFL endorsement for the Eighth
  Ward City Council seat because no candidate received the votes of 60% of
  the convention delegates.
> 3.   The DFL endorsement means a great deal in Minneapolis and is
  considered to be an important tool in winning elections.
...
  endorsements and supporters on the back.  It did not list the DFL as an
  endorsement.  Upon receipt of the fourth brochure from the printer,
  Glidden’s campaign discontinued use of all the old literature.
...
  against Glidden, alleging that Glidden’s campaign brochures and website
  falsely claimed the support or endorsement of the DFL party.
>      22.   Glidden became aware of the allegations in the complaint on
...
  Glidden distributed a piece reprinting, with the permission of the Star
  Tribune, the entirety of the editorial endorsement.
>      26.   A day or so before the general election, Hauser’s campaign
...
  to believe that Glidden used the initials “DFL” next to her name to
  suggest the endorsement or support of the DFL party in violation of Minn.
  Stat. 211B.02.  This matter has been assigned to a panel of three
...
  stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of an organization.”
>      3.    The Respondents did not knowingly make a false claim stating or
  implying that Elizabeth Glidden had the support or endorsement of the DFL
  party.
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate has the support or
  endorsement of a major political party.  There are three Minnesota Supreme
  Court cases that address the issue of candidates not endorsed by the DFL
...
  candidate’s use of the initials “DFL” would imply to the average voter
  that the candidate had the endorsement, or, at the very least, the support
  of the DFL party.  The court explained that candidates have a right to
...
  intended to modify “DFL” as an indication of party affiliation and not
  endorsement.  The candidate insisted that he did not intend to violate the
  statute and that he made a conscious attempt to comply with the law.
...
  DFL” and found that the use of the initials “DFL” without the modifying
  language authorized in Schmitt implied party endorsement.  However, in
  determining whether the candidate’s false implication of party support was
...
  have “knowingly” violated the statute “if he knew that his literature
  falsely claimed or implied that he had party support or endorsement.”  In
  order to make this determination, the Court explained that the candidate’s
...
  from the voter’s familiarity with party sample ballots short of an
  outright claim of endorsement.”  Thus, the Court found the candidate’s
  violation was committed knowingly.
...
  campaign material cannot be viewed as a “thinly disguised attempt” to
  imply DFL endorsement.  Rather, Ms. Glidden and her campaign staff
  specifically and accurately listed her endorsements on all of her
...
  Glidden’s use of “DFL” was confined to brochures that also contained
  endorsement information that made it clear that the DFL party was not
  among the organizations that endorsed her.
...
  here that Respondents knew their campaign material may have implied
  falsely that Glidden had party endorsement and that they consciously took
  the risk and distributed the material despite this knowledge.  Accordingly,

================================================
632616886.Prob.Cause.doc         3-6302-16119-CV     More; 
================================================
...   Page  1
  a prima facie violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.02  (false claim of support
  or endorsement). Judge Neilson’s dismissal of Ms. Anderson’s claim of
  false endorsement does not preclude consideration of a claim of false
  campaign material under Minn. Stat. § 211B.06.

==========================================
632616886.fdg.rt.doc         6326-16886-CV     More; 
==========================================
...   Page  1
  Hauser is a member of the DFL party but does not have the DFL party’s
  endorsement.  Currently, Ms. Hauser is a Minneapolis Park and Recreation
  Board (“Park Board”) Commissioner for District 3.  Ms. Hauser has been a
...
  none of the candidates for 8th Ward City Council obtained a large enough
  percentage of the votes to win the DFL endorsement.
> Mary Merrill Anderson is a DFL-endorsed candidate for Commissioner at
...
  Board is made up of six district commissioners and three at-large
  commissioners.  In addition to her DFL endorsement, Ms. Anderson’s
  candidacy has been endorsed by AFSCME, DFL Feminist Caucus, Stonewall DFL,
...
  endorsements and endorsements from other organizations, as well as the DFL
  endorsement, without any assistance from Ms. Hauser or Hauser’s campaign
  committee.
...
  Anderson supported Hayden and the response was that the Committee was not
  asking for Anderson’s endorsement but instead was supporting her.
> Ms. Hauser and the Hauser Committee never sought permission from Ms.
...
  a statement that can be verified or proven false.  Some people might
  interpret it as Complainant does, that it implies an endorsement.  Others
  might at least as reasonably interpret it to be promoting a team to be

========================================
632616855.OR.doc         1-0320-16155-CV   More; 
========================================
...   Page  1
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.  A person or candidate may not state in written campaign
  material that the candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of an individual without first getting written permission from
  the individual to do so.
> The first sentence of this statute prohibits a candidate from falsely
  stating or implying that she has the endorsement or support of a “major
  political party or party unit or of an organization.”  In Matter of
...
  campaign material does not falsely state or imply that she has the support
  or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or organization.
  Thus, the first sentence of section 211B.02 does not apply here.
> The second sentence of the statute prohibits a candidate from “stating in
  written campaign material” that she has the support or endorsement of an
  individual without first getting permission from the individual to do so.
...
  second sentence of section 211B.02 requires that the alleged false support
  or endorsement of an individual be based on an explicit written statement
  and not merely an implication.
...
  candidates from stating or implying in written campaign material that the
  candidate had an individual’s support or endorsement, but it did not do so
  .
...
  campaign did not state in the written campaign material that Ms. Hauser
  had Ms. Anderson’s support or endorsement, the Complaint fails to identify
  a prima facie violation of Minnesota Chapter 211B.02 and therefore is

==============================================
632616855.DISM.OR2.doc         1-0320-16155-CV    More; 
==============================================
...   Page  1
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.  A person or candidate may not state in written campaign
  material that the candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of an individual without first getting written permission from
  the individual to do so.
> The first sentence of this statute prohibits a candidate from falsely
  stating or implying that she has the endorsement or support of a “major
  political party or party unit or of an organization.”  In Matter of
...
  campaign material does not falsely state or imply that she has the support
  or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or organization.
  Thus, the first sentence of section 211B.02 does not apply here.
> The second sentence of the statute prohibits a candidate from “stating in
  written campaign material” that she has the support or endorsement of an
  individual without first getting permission from the individual to do so.
...
  second sentence of section 211B.02 requires that the alleged false support
  or endorsement of an individual be based on an explicit written statement
  and not merely an implication.
...
  candidates from stating or implying in written campaign material that the
  candidate had an individual’s support or endorsement, but it did not do so
  .
...
  campaign did not state in the written campaign material that Ms. Hauser
  had Ms. Anderson’s support or endorsement, the Complaint fails to identify
  a prima facie violation of Minnesota Chapter 211B.02 and therefore is

=============================================
632616855.DISM.OR.doc         1-0320-16155-CV     More; 
=============================================
...   Page  1
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.  A person or candidate may not state in written campaign
  material that the candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of an individual without first getting written permission from
  the individual to do so.
> The first sentence of this statute prohibits a candidate from falsely
  stating or implying that she has the endorsement or support of a “major
  political party or party unit or of an organization.”  In Matter of
...
  campaign material does not falsely state or imply that she has the support
  or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or organization.
  Thus, the first sentence of section 211B.02 does not apply here.
> The second sentence of the statute prohibits a candidate from “stating in
  written campaign material” that she has the support or endorsement of an
  individual without first getting permission from the individual to do so.
...
  second sentence of section 211B.02 requires that the alleged false support
  or endorsement of an individual be based on an explicit written statement
  and not merely an implication.
...
  candidates from stating or implying in written campaign material that the
  candidate had an individual’s support or endorsement, but it did not do so
  .
...
  campaign did not state in the written campaign material that Ms. Hauser
  had Ms. Anderson’s support or endorsement, the Complaint fails to identify
  a prima facie violation of Minnesota Chapter 211B.02 and therefore is

================================================
632616853.Prob.Cause.doc         3-6302-16119-CV     More; 
================================================
...   Page  1
  Both are first-time candidates and both are affiliated with the DFL party.
  Neither has the DFL party’s endorsement.  Mr. Stone filed this complaint
  alleging that Ms. Kummer’s use of the initials “DFL” on her campaign
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.  A person or candidate may not state in written campaign
  material that the candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of an individual without first getting written permission from
  the individual to do so.
...
  candidate’s use of the initials “DFL” falsely implied that the candidate
  had the endorsement of the DFL party in violation of Minnesota election
  law.  The court explained that, while candidates have a right to inform

================================================
632616853.primafacie.doc         3-0320-16229-CV    More; 
================================================
...   Page  1
  name. Stone alleges that the use of the initials “DFL” falsely implies
  that Kummer has the endorsement or support of the DFL party.  According to
  Stone, there is no DFL-endorsed candidate in the Park District 5 race.
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party unit or of an
  organization.  A person or candidate may not state in written campaign
  material that the candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of an individual without first getting written permission from
  the individual to do so.
...
  candidate’s use of the initials “DFL” falsely implied that the candidate
  had the endorsement of the DFL party in violation of Minnesota election
  law.  The Administrative Law Judge concludes that the complaint does

============================================
632616853.fdg.rt.doc         3-0320-16263-CV    More; 
============================================
...   Page  1
  violate Minn. Stat. § 211B.02 by falsely implying that Carol Kummer had
  the endorsement of the DFL party?
>      The panel concludes that the Respondent violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  02 by knowingly using the initials DFL on campaign material, which falsely
  implied that Carol Kummer had the endorsement or support of the DFL party.
  A fine in the amount of $600 is imposed.
...
  seat.  Both are affiliated with the Democratic-Farmer-Laborer (“DFL”)
  party, but neither won the party’s endorsement.  However, both Mr. Stone
  and Ms. Kummer will be identified as “DFL” on the November ballot.
...
  Minneapolis tend to elect DFL-endorsed candidates over other candidates.
  Therefore, the DFL endorsement is considered to be an important tool in
  winning elections.
...
  of “Green Party” on his campaign material.  In his posting, Mr. Bonham
  opined that such activity would falsely imply party endorsement and would
  be a violation of Minnesota Statute 211B.02.  Mr. Bonham advised that non-
...
  Stone’s posting.  Mr. Bush stated that, although there was no party
  endorsement for the District 5 Park Board race, Ms. Kummer, as a proud
  life-long member of the DFL Party, was within her “legal means” to display
...
  endorsed candidate’s use of the initials “DFL” would falsely imply to the
  average voter that the candidate had the endorsement or support of the DFL
  party in violation of Minnesota election law.
...
> It is common practice for endorsed candidates to advertise their party’s
  endorsement on their campaign material via an explicit statement to the
  effect that they are “DFL Endorsed.”
...
  or candidate may not knowingly make, directly or indirectly, a false claim
  stating or implying that a candidate has the support or endorsement of a
  major political party or party unit or of an organization.
...
  disseminating campaign material that used the initials “DFL” to imply
  falsely endorsement or support of the DFL party.
>      Based upon the record herein, and for the reasons stated in the
...
  or indirectly, a false claim stating or implying that the candidate has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party.
> In Schmitt v. McLaughlin, the Minnesota Supreme Court held that a
  candidate’s use of the initials “DFL” falsely implied that the candidate
  had the endorsement of the DFL party in violation of Minnesota election
  law.  The court explained that, while candidates have a right to inform
...
  the initials without such modifiers “would imply to the average voter that
  the contestee had the endorsement or, at the very least, the support of
  the DFL party.  To hold otherwise would render the word ‘imply’
...
> Ms. Kummer argues that she did not knowingly use the initials to falsely
  imply endorsement.  She insists that it was never her intent to mislead
  anyone.  In fact, she says she deliberately put the initials “DFL” in
  italicized print and separated them from the words “Labor Endorsed” in her
  campaign material in order to avoid the implication of endorsement.
> In Matter of Ryan, a non-endorsed candidate for County Commissioner
...
  knew that his literature falsely claimed or implied that he had party
  support or endorsement.”  The Court noted that the candidate was an
  experienced party regular who had run in a number of elections.  By not
...
  advertising by endorsed candidates, the Court found that the non-endorsed
  candidate’s use of the initials “DFL” would imply endorsement or support
  of the DFL party.  Ms. Kummer maintains that the prevailing practice in
...
  knowingly prepared and disseminated campaign material that falsely implied
  support or endorsement of the DFL party.  The fact that other candidates
  during this election year may be violating Minn. Stat. § 211B.02 does not
...
  She and her campaign co-chairs had notice that her campaign material may
  have implied falsely that she had party endorsement, yet they took the
  risk of a subsequent complaint and distributed the prepared material.
...
  The case law establishes clearly that unqualified use of the initials “DFL
  ,” standing alone, in fact implies endorsement to the average voter.  In
  this case, such a claim is false, misleading, and violates Minn. Stat. §
...
  likely that Ms. Kummer has gained an advantage in the upcoming election by
  implying she has the support or endorsement of the DFL party.  The panel
  concludes that a penalty of $600 is appropriate.
...
>  Testimony of Bonham.
>  Sixty percent of the vote was needed to win the DFL party’s endorsement.
  Mr. Stone and Ms. Kummer each received about 50 percent of the vote, with
...
  such as this, possibly as many as one-third, might be confused and think “
  DFL” standing alone implied party endorsement.
>  Minn. Stat. § 211B.35, subd. 2.

====================================================
631217667.primafacie.ord.doc         8-6312-17667-CV    More; 
====================================================
...   Page  1
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.  A person or candidate may not state in written campaign
  material that the candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of an individual without first getting written permission from
  the individual to do so.
...
  individuals.  The first sentence of this statute prohibits a candidate
  from falsely stating or implying that he or she has the endorsement or
  support of a “major political party or party unit or of an organization.”
  The second sentence prohibits a candidate from “stating in written
  campaign material” that he or she has the “support or endorsement of an
  individual without first getting permission from the individual to do so.”
...
  statute does prohibit false implications of organizational support or
  endorsement, the Legislature has not prohibited false implications of
  individual support or endorsement.
> Likewise important, Minnesota Statutes § 211B.02 is a criminal statute,
...
> Applying the law to the facts in this case, Flyer 1 does not state that
  Ted Phillips has the support or endorsement of the other candidates.  By
  grouping his name with the other candidates, the flyer may imply that

==============================================
631217602.DISM.OR.doc         12-6312-17602-CV    More; 
==============================================
...   Page  1
  intimidation.”  According to the Complainant, a two-thirds unanimous vote
  of the full department at an open meeting is needed for any endorsement.
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.02 provides as follows:
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.  A person or candidate may not state in written campaign
  material that the candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of an individual without first getting written permission from
  the individual to do so.
> The statute prohibits a candidate from knowingly making a false claim that
  he or she has the endorsement or support of an organization.  The
  Complainant does not deny that the Respondents were given the endorsement
  of the volunteer fire department.  Instead, the Complaint alleges that the
  Fire Chief did not follow the “standard” endorsement process and obtained
  signatures for Respondents’ endorsement improperly.  Because the Complaint
  does not allege that the Respondents falsely claimed to have the
  endorsement of the fire department, it fails to identify a prima facie
  violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.02 on the part of the Respondents.  This
...
  statement “Fire Department Endorsed” is false.  Again, the Complainant
  does not deny that the endorsement of the volunteer fire department was
  given to the Respondents.  Instead, the Complaint alleges that the Fire
  Chief did not follow the proper endorsement process.  This allegation is
  not sufficient to state a prima facie violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.06.

=================================================
032019447.primafacie.doc         11-0320-19447-CV   More; 
=================================================
...   Page  1
  211B.06 by falsely implying that Mr. Downey is the incumbent and that he
  has the Republican Party endorsement for the House 41A district seat.
  After reviewing the Complaint and attached documents, the undersigned
...
  district seat in the November 2008 election.  He does not have the
  endorsement of the Republican Party and he is not the incumbent.  (Ron
  Erhardt, a Republican, is the current State Representative for District
...
> Vote Keith Downey
> Republican Endorsement for State Representative
> Similarly, the following phrases appear next to a picture of Mr. Downey on
...
>      Vote Keith Downey
>      Republican Endorsement!
> The Complaint alleges that by using the phrase “Republican Endorsement,”
  the Respondent has knowingly violated Minn. Stat. §§ 211B.02 and 211B.06
  by falsely implying he is the incumbent and that he has the Republican
  Party endorsement.
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.02 provides in relevant part as follows:
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party unit or of an
  organization.
> The issue arising under 211B.02 in this case is whether, by using the
  phrase “Republican Endorsement” on the campaign brochure, the Respondents
  knowingly falsely implied that Mr. Downey has the endorsement of the
  Republican Party of Minnesota.  In Schmitt v. McLaughlin, the Minnesota
  Supreme Court held that a candidate’s use of the initials “DFL” would
  imply to the average voter that the candidate had the endorsement, or, at
  the very least, the support of the DFL party.  To hold otherwise,
  according to the court, would render the word “imply” meaningless.
  Accordingly, a false implication of support or endorsement is as much a
  violation as an overtly false claim.
...
  were to establish that the Respondents knowingly made the claim “
  Republican Endorsement” to falsely imply that the Republican Party of
  Minnesota endorses Mr. Downey’s candidacy, that would be a violation of
...
  by falsely implying that Mr. Downey is the incumbent candidate and that he
  has the endorsement of the Republican Party of Minnesota.
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.06, subd. 1, prohibits intentional participation:
...
  prohibit inferences or implications, even if misleading.  The phrase “
  Republican Endorsement” is not a false statement of fact.  It is arguably
  a false implication of party endorsement, but implications do not come
  within the purview of Section 211B.06.  Likewise, the campaign brochure
...
  set on for an evidentiary hearing before a panel of three administrative
  law judges to consider the false claim of endorsement allegation made
  under 211B.02.  An order scheduling this matter for a telephone prehearing

===========================================
032019447.evidentiary.or.htm             More; 
===========================================
...   Page  1
  211B.06 by falsely implying that Mr. Downey is the incumbent and that he
  has the Republican Party endorsement for the House 41A district seat.
  Administrative Law Judge Barbara L. Neilson reviewed the Complaint and, by

==============================================
032017790.fdg.mbg.doc         15-0320-17790-CV    More; 
==============================================
...   Page  1
> Although his “pro-life” position put him at odds with the DFL Party
  platform, Mr. Sluss won the DFL Party endorsement for Senate District 12
  in April 2006.  His opponent in the November general election was Paul
  Koering, the incumbent Republican candidate.
> In an April 3, 2006, article about Mr. Sluss’ endorsement by the DFL Party
  that appeared in the Brainerd Dispatch newspaper, Mr. Sluss identified
...
  accurate information on candidates’ positions regarding “life issues.”
  The letter also stated in bold print that endorsement by MCCL “is based on
  several factors including response to this questionnaire.”

=============================================
032017509.rt.mbg.doc         11-0320-17509-CV   More; 
=============================================
...   Page  1
  fundraiser held at O’Gara’s restaurant on February 21, 2006.  There was no
  endorsement on the checks submitted for deposit.
> Sometime in July of 2006, Ms. Gunderson quit her position with the

==============================================
032017434.DISM.OR.doc         11-0320-17434-CV   More; 
==============================================
...   Page  1
 
> Delegates to the Senate District 36 endorsement convention convened on
  March 25, 2006 to elect local party leaders and endorse candidates for
...
> The Complainant is a DFL candidate for Senate District 36.  His opponent,
  Carolyn Sampson, received the DFL endorsement.  According to the Complaint,
  Ms. Sampson is also the “webmaster” of the DFL District 36 website.  The

=================================================
032017404.Prob.Cause.doc         11-0320-17404-CV    More; 
=================================================
...   Page  1
  campaign for the 5th Congressional District seat, Ms. Reichgott Junge does
  not have the endorsement of the DFL party.  Instead, the DFL party
  endorsed Keith Ellison.
...
  campaign billboards, email correspondence and website, thereby falsely
  implying that she has the endorsement of the DFL party, and by not ceasing
  the violation despite notice and demand.
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.  A person or candidate may not state in written campaign
  material that the candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of an individual without first getting written permission from
  the individual to do so.
...
  Minn. Stat. § 211B.02 because it falsely implied that she had the DFL
  party’s support or endorsement.  Ms. Reichgott Junge testified at the
  probable cause hearing that she was shocked to receive Mr. Weinblatt’s
  letter and was unaware that use of the initials “DFL” by a non-endorsed
  candidate was viewed as falsely implying endorsement of the party in
  violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.02.
...
  candidate’s use of the initials “DFL” falsely implied that the candidate
  had the endorsement of the DFL party in violation of Minnesota election
  law.  The court explained that, while candidates have a right to inform
...
> Respondent argues that the use of the initials “DFL” on her campaign
  billboards and material does not state or imply party endorsement.
  Respondent maintains that the gravamen in the Schmitt case was that the “
  average” voter could be misled into thinking that the candidate had party
  endorsement.  Here, Respondent has submitted as exhibits eight affidavits
  of prospective voters, each stating that they are familiar with
...
  asserts that the potential for voter confusion is even greater where a
  candidate implies that he or she has the party’s endorsement in the
  context of a party’s primary election.
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.02 prohibits a candidate from knowingly making a false
  claim implying party support or endorsement.  There is no exception
  provided in the statute for partisan races.  In addition, the Minnesota
...
  that use of the initials “DFL,” without modifiers such as “member” or “
  affiliate,” implies endorsement to the average voter.  In none of these
  decisions did the Minnesota Supreme Court find the partisan or non-
...
  occurred as alleged in the complaint.  The material facts in this case are
  not in dispute.  Ms. Junge does not have the DFL Party’s endorsement, yet
  she has used the initials “DFL” on campaign material and has continued to

=================================================
032017404.primafacie.doc         11-0320-17404-CV    More; 
=================================================
...   Page  1
> The Respondent is a candidate for Minnesota’s Fifth Congressional District
  .  She does not have the endorsement of the DFL party.  The Complaint
  alleges that the Respondent has knowingly violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.02
  by placing the initials “DFL” on billboards, email correspondence and a
  campaign website that falsely imply that she has the endorsement of the
  DFL party and by not ceasing the violation despite notice and demand.  The
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party unit or of an
  organization.
...
  candidate’s use of the initials “DFL” falsely implied that the candidate
  had the endorsement of the DFL party in violation of Minnesota election
  law.  The Administrative Law Judge concludes that the complaint does

==========================
032017388.fdg.doc      More;    
==========================
...   Page  1
  Senator Dick Day had encouraged Ms. Walch to run for the seat.  All three
  candidates sought the Republican Party endorsement.
>   In February of 2006, Respondent Dan Miller began volunteering as an
...
  defeating the Complainant’s candidacy and promoting Meg Walch’s candidacy.
  Miller believed that the race for the Republican Party’s endorsement for
  the Senate District 28 seat was between the Complainant and Meg Walch, and
...
  with about 10 people, including delegates.
>  Neither the Complainant nor Ms. Walch received the Republican endorsement
  for the Senate District 28 seat at the endorsing convention.  Instead,
  Steve Wilson won the endorsement.  Ms. Walch signed a pledge that she
  would support the endorsed candidate and she is no longer running for the
...
  election.
> It is true that influencing a political party’s endorsement will likely
  ultimately influence a primary or general election.  But that is

=============================================
032016574.dism.or.doc         6-0320-16574-CV    More; 
=============================================
...   Page  1
  terms as State Representative.  In 2004, he lost the Republican party’s
  endorsement to Ms. Peppin.  The events complained of arose during the 2004
  election.

========================================
032016263.rt.doc         3-0320-16263-CV   More; 
========================================
...   Page  1
  campaign material for two candidates that contained a false claim of
  endorsement by the Minnesota Farm Bureau?
>      The panel concludes that the Respondent violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  02 by knowingly making a false claim of endorsement of an organization.  A
  fine in the amount of $800 is imposed ($400 per violation).
...
  legislative districts.  The total cost of the two mailings containing the
  incorrect endorsement was about $15,000.
> 6.   The Minnesota Farm Bureau generally does not endorse any candidates
...
  candidates for political office.  At that time, the campaign manager for
  the DFL reviewed the six mailings and noticed the endorsement error in the
  two pieces.  He contacted the Farm Bureau to notify the bureau of the
...
  prepared a postcard correction notice that was mailed to each person who
  received a copy of the mailings containing the incorrect endorsement.  The
  postcards were prepared October 28, 2004, and printed during the weekend
...
  or candidate may not knowingly make, directly or indirectly, a false claim
  stating or implying that a candidate has the support or endorsement of a
  major political party or party unit or of an organization.
...
  that the Minnesota DFL Party violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.02 by knowingly
  making a false claim of endorsement by the Minnesota Farm Bureau on behalf
  of two candidates for the Minnesota House of Representatives.
...
> The parties do not dispute that the mailings containing the Farm Bureau
  endorsements constituted a false claim of endorsement by an organization.
  The dispute here is whether the Minnesota DFL Party knowingly made such a
...
  knowingly make, directly or indirectly, a false claim stating or implying
  that a candidate has the support or endorsement of a major political party
  or party unit or of an organization.  For a violation to be established,
  the complainant must show a knowingly false claim of endorsement.  The
  panel has little difficulty in concluding that the Minnesota DFL Party

=================================================
032016263.Probable.Cause.OR.doc         DOCKET NO    More; 
=================================================
...   Page  1
  roughly 5,000 mailed to Peterson’s district, and 10,000 mailed to Koenen’s
  district.  The DFL learned of the erroneous endorsement listing on October
  27, and on that same day it faxed correction notices to five newspapers in
...
  of them erroneously identified the Minnesota Farm Bureau.  Complainant
  believes that this difference indicates that the incorrect endorsement was
  more than just a clerical error, and was instead a knowing violation of
...
  the flyers were erroneous.  Respondent argues that the statute was not
  violated because the incorrect endorsement was not “knowingly” made.  It
  urges that the Complaint be dismissed.

=========================================
032016254.pf.smm.doc         032016254.pf    More; 
=========================================
...   Page  1
  candidate and asking that Republicans not vote for Lindner.  The letter
  makes certain statements regarding the Republican Party’s endorsement of
  Peppin over Lindner and Lindner’s endorsement by a different Republican
  organization.  The Complaint alleges those statements to be false.  Again,

==========================================
032016254.fdg.doc         12-0320-16254-CV   More; 
==========================================
...   Page  1
  State Representative.  In 2004, Mr. Lindner lost the Republican Party’s
  endorsement to Ms. Peppin.
> During the November 2004 election, Lindner campaign workers would stop at

=============================================================
032016235.order-ProbCause.doc         032016053.or finding pf   More; 
=============================================================
...   Page  1
  Complainant alleges that he asked the caller why Mr. Lindner did not
  receive the Republican endorsement, and that she replied that Democrats
  had attended the endorsing convention, the wrong person received
  endorsement, and that another Republican caucus was held later where
  Democrats were not allowed in, and that Respondent was endorsed.
...
  it has endorsed the Respondent.
> The Respondent does not have the endorsement of the Republican Party or
  any of its units.
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.
...
  that Respondent’s campaign directly or indirectly stated or implied that
  the Respondent had the endorsement of the Republican Party or one of its
  units when a campaign worker told Complainant that the Respondent was the “
...
  that the statements “I am the True Republican and the True Conservative,”
  or including the endorsement of the Twin Cities Republican Association in
  Attachment D either states or implies that the Respondent has the
  endorsement of the Republican Party or one of its units.
> Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and for the reasons
...
  that he knew that the Respondent had not received the Republican Party
  endorsement and that he specifically asked the caller why the endorsement
  had been denied.  In that context, even if the Complainant is correct that
...
  Republican nominee,” the statement neither stated nor implied that the
  Respondent had the endorsement of the Republican Party.  To the contrary,
  accepting Complainant’s testimony that the campaign worker made the
  statement in the context of responding to the question about the failure
  to get endorsement, the statement could only be interpreted as ascribing
  Republican values or principles to the Respondent.
...
  closer question.  But these statements were made during a discussion of
  Respondent’s failure to receive the Republican Party endorsement and could
  not reasonably be construed as false.
...
  Claiming that he is an Independent Republican does not imply Republican
  Party endorsement.  At the end of the letter, Respondent lists his
  endorsement by the Republican Party from 1992 through 2003, and
  endorsement by the Twin Cities Republican Association.  The letter makes
  no claim to endorsement in the November election by the Republican Party
  or any of its units.
...
  caucuses that are the organizational “units” of a political party.  The
  Respondent did not claim endorsement by any such unit, nor could the
  language of the letter reasonably imply one.  Instead, the risk in this
...
  Respondent.  The statute does not prohibit a candidate from listing an
  organization’s endorsement because the organization’s name might mislead
  voters into making a connection where there is none.  There are many
...
  free to choose their names.  There is no allegation that the Respondent
  created the organization or sought its endorsement in order to mislead
  voters.  There is no allegation that the Respondent did not have the
  endorsement of the Twin Cities Republican Association.
> Ms. Peppin testified that she is extremely concerned about the
...
  conversation with a person questioning her about the Republican
  endorsement.  The Complainant believed that Ms. Lindsay could have been
  the caller, but he was not certain.
...
  make, directly or indirectly, a false claim stating or implying that the
  candidate has the support or endorsement of any political party, or unit
  thereof, or of any organization, when in fact the candidate does not have
  such support or endorsement.”
>  Graves v. Meland, 264 N.W.2d 401, 404 (Minn. 1978).

=========================================
032016229.fdg.doc         3-0320-16229-CV   More; 
=========================================
...   Page  1
  majority does not believe that the use of the word “implying” relative to
  a false endorsement in Minn. Stat. § 211B.02, but not relative to a false
  statement in Minn. Stat. § 211B.06, has any bearing on this case.  We
...
  false claim stating or implying that a candidate or ballot question has
  the support or endorsement of a major political party or party unit or of
  an organization.  A person or candidate may not state in written campaign
  material that the candidate or ballot question has the support or
  endorsement of an individual without first getting written permission from
  the individual to do so.  [Emphasis supplied.]

	 


===========================================
638517601.pf.or.doc         3-XXXX-XXXXX-CV  More; 
===========================================
...   Page  1
  representation of fact.
> The burden of proving the falsity of a factual statement cannot be met by
  showing only that the statement is not literally true in every detail.  If
...
  case at that amount.  Although the characterization of the settlement as “
  political payback” is opinion, there is an underlying factual assertion
  that the agreement to settle the lawsuit was somehow connected to the
  plaintiff’s political contribution to Herbst.  If the evidence at a
  hearing were to establish that the underlying factual assertion is not
  true and that Respondents knew it was false or communicated it with

====================================================
638417728.primafacie.ord.doc         3-6384-17728-CV  More; 
====================================================
...   Page  1
  understand that the statement is not a representation of fact.
> The burden of proving the falsity of a factual statement cannot be met by
  showing only that the statement is not literally true in every detail.  If

==========================================
638116304.FDG.doc         22-6381-16304-CV  More; 
==========================================
...   Page  1
  phrasing of the flyer is oriented in terms of argument, with little
  factual content, it is not within the jurisdiction of the statute.
> “I am opposed to the new 5% Utility Bill Tax imposed by the City of Grant.”

==================================================
636117183.DISM.OR.smm.doc         12-6361-17183-CV  More; 
==================================================
...   Page  1
  the statements concerning Mayor Longrie’s lack of experience.  The
  statements reflect Respondent’s opinion and are not factual statements
  that may be proven true or false.  Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 is directed

=========================================
632617627.or.doc         15-6326-17627-CV  More; 
=========================================
...   Page  1
  that the statement is not a representation of fact.
> The burden of proving the falsity of a factual statement cannot be met by
  showing only that the statement is not literally true in every detail.  If

====================================================
632617585 primafacie ord.doc         8-6326-17585-CV  More; 
====================================================
...   Page  1
  Again, the Complainant does not allege that this is a false statement of
  fact, but instead requests factual support for the CCS claim.  Because the
  Complainant does not allege that this is a false statement of fact, this

=================================================
632617493.Prob.Cause.doc         12-6326-17493-CV   More; 
=================================================
...   Page  1
  contribution limit.  Whether the Respondents simply made a reporting error
  and mischaracterized the expenditure as they claim, is a factual
  determination that should be left to a panel of administrative law judges

===========================================================
632616965.partial.dism.OR.doc         Fine v. Bernstein (2)  More; 
===========================================================
...   Page  1
  summary judgment, the Judges must view the facts in the light most
  favorable to the non-moving party.  All doubts and factual inferences must
  be resolved against the moving party.  If reasonable minds could differ as

==========================================
632616886.fdg.rt.doc         6326-16886-CV  More; 
==========================================
...   Page  1
  group on the same side” or “a group organized to work together.”  In my
  view the flyer as a whole is a specific factual statement that Marie
  Hauser, Mary Merrill Anderson, and Tom Nordyke are candidates acting “on

==============================================
632616420.dism.ord.doc         3-6302-16119-CV   More; 
==============================================
...   Page  1
  facts in the light most favorable to the non-moving party.  All doubts and
  factual inferences must be resolved against the moving party.  If
  reasonable minds could differ as to the import of the evidence, judgment

=========================================
632616253.fng.doc         3-6326-16253-CV  More; 
=========================================
...   Page  1
  and urges the reader to vote for Trepanier’s opponent, Rand Haglund.  One
  side is a colorful display of small bits of factual information, presented
  in separate boxes to resemble newspaper headlines.  The reverse is a three-

==========================================
632217734.ord.doc         12-6322-17734-CV  More; 
==========================================
...   Page  1
  understand that the statement is not a representation of fact.
> The burden of proving the falsity of a factual statement cannot be met by
  showing only that the statement is not literally true in every detail.  If

===========================================
632217617.pf.or.doc         3-XXXX-XXXXX-CV  More; 
===========================================
...   Page  1
  that the statement is not a representation of fact.
> The burden of proving the falsity of a factual statement cannot be met by
  showing only that the statement is not literally true in every detail.  If

========================================
632217617 or.doc         4-6322-17617-CV  More; 
========================================
...   Page  1
> Mr. Corson has submitted conflicting evidence in support of his assertion.
  It is not possible to resolve this factual dispute concerning the
  statement in Item 5 based on the record currently before the
...
  deductions.  The assertion that a failure to act has “adversely affected”
  the County is not a factual statement and is therefore insufficient to
  support allegation that there was a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.06,

=================================================
631817949.prob.cause.doc         11-6318-17949-CV  More; 
=================================================
...   Page  1
  new High School.
> Factual Background
> The relevant facts in this case are undisputed.  In February 2005,
...
  awareness” of its probable falsity.  In addition, the burden of proving
  the falsity of a factual statement cannot be met by showing only that the
  statement is not literally true in every detail.  If the statement is true

==============================================
630119304.DISM.OR.doc         12-6301-19304-CV  More; 
==============================================
...   Page  1
  amendment, City Councilmember Jim Saefke spoke in support of it, and the
  City Finance Director presented neutral factual information.  The
  Complaint states that during the forum, the Mayor participated by “asking

==============================================================
630116266.probcause.smm.doc         630116266.probcause.or.smm  More; 
==============================================================
...   Page  1
  not a “demand to shred public documents to cover up involvement.”  While
  there are several factual issues to resolve on this particular allegation
  and the other allegedly false statements identified in the Complaint,

=============================================
630116266.pf.smm.doc         630116266.pf.smm  More; 
=============================================
...   Page  1
  required by Minn. Stat. § 211A.02 to file the same reports referred to
  above.  While there are some factual issues about whether a report is yet
  due, the Complaint states a prima facie violation by ACT of the reporting

=========================================
630116266.fdg.doc         1-6301-16266-CV  More; 
=========================================
...   Page  1
> “Thank you to the thousands of concerned residents who visited this
  website.  The goal of ACT is solely to present factual public information
  that you have a right to know.  Again, ACT is not affiliated with any
...
>  The Complainant also at times argued that the statements were false on
  their merits.  But as no evidence as to the factual basis underlying the
  allegations was offered or admitted, this decision is limited to whether

====================================================
032017816.dismissal.ord.doc         12-0320-17816-CV  More; 
====================================================
...   Page  1
  context, the reader would understand that the statement is not a
  representation of fact.  The burden of proving the falsity of a factual
  statement cannot be met by showing only that the statement is not

==============================================
032017790.fdg.mbg.doc         15-0320-17790-CV  More; 
==============================================
...   Page  1
  past for measures to protect the unborn does not render the statement a
  false factual assertion.  In addition, contrary to the Complainant’s claim,
  the reckless disregard standard under Minnesota Statutes § 211B.06 does

=================================================
032017530.Prob.Cause.doc         15-0320-17530-CV  More; 
=================================================
...   Page  1
  211B.06.  Representative Hortman was the Chief Author of HF 2310.  Whether
  this bill would have “reduced homeowner property taxes” requires factual
  determinations that must be left to a panel of administrative law judges

=================================================
032017509.Prob.Cause.doc         11-0320-17509-CV  More; 
=================================================
...   Page  1
  the expenditures at issue as “Aviation Insurance” and spending on “
  airplane models” requires factual determinations and assessments of
  credibility that must be left to a panel of administrative law judges to

==============================================
032017434.DISM.OR.doc         11-0320-17434-CV  More; 
==============================================
...   Page  1
  contributions for herself and the other candidates listed on the webpage
  lacks a factual basis and is mere speculation.  It appears in any case
  from a review of the website that contributions are made by clicking on

=========================================
032016229.fdg.doc         3-0320-16229-CV  More; 
=========================================
...   Page  1
  light on what senses of “false” the legislature intended the word to
  include when applying the statute to particular factual situations.  But
  there are some things that do tend to shed light on legislative intent.

	 

=====================================================
630116405.fdg.doc         Campaign Complaint Findings  More;
=====================================================
...   Page  1
> The City of Columbia Heights is governed by a five-member Council,
...
 
> False campaign material
> In a campaign letter dated October 26, 2004, and sent by U.S. mail to the
...
  to Nedegaard’s corporations.
  Complainants.  The standard of proof of a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  06, relating to false campaign material, is clear and convincing evidence.
  The standard of proof of any other violation of chapter 211A or 211B is a
...
  companies to place campaign signs on corporate property.
> False Campaign Material
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 prohibits the preparation and dissemination of false
  campaign material.  In order to be found to have violated this section, a
  person must participate in the preparation or dissemination of false
  campaign material that the person knows is false or communicates with
  reckless disregard of whether it is false.  On or about October 26, 2004,

=========================================
638517601.fdg.doc         3-6385-17601-CV  More;
=========================================
...   Page  1
>      Did Respondents violate Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 by intentionally
  participating in the preparation or dissemination of false campaign
  material that Respondents knew was false or communicated to others with
  reckless disregard as to whether it was false?
...
  
  Complainants.  The standard of proof of a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  06, relating to false campaign material, is clear and convincing evidence.
> The Complainants have demonstrated by clear and convincing evidence that
...
> MEMORANDUM
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 prohibits the preparation and dissemination of false
  campaign material.  In order to be found to have violated this section, a
  person must intentionally participate in the preparation or dissemination

============================================
638517049.fdg.rt.doc         4-6385-17049-CV  More;
============================================
...   Page  1
 
  the Office of Administrative Hearings against Respondents alleging they
  violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 by preparing and distributing false
  campaign material.  The Complaint alleged 17 violations of Minn. Stat. §
  211B.06.
...
  Minn. Stat. § 211B.06.  The remaining 14 allegations were dismissed.
> False Campaign Material   Tax Shift
> On or about December 8, 2005, Respondent Niska prepared and distributed a
...
  the statement is not false.
> False Campaign Material   Construction Delivery Method
> Sometime in approximately late 2003, the HLWW School District began the
...
  will cost approximately $27 million.
> False Campaign Material   Bribe
> The same four page campaign document prepared and distributed by
...
  Complainant.  The standard of proof of a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  06, relating to false campaign material, is clear and convincing evidence.
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.01, subd. 2, defines “campaign material” to mean “any
...
> MEMORANDUM
> False Campaign Material
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 prohibits the preparation or dissemination of false
  campaign material with respect to the effect of a ballot question.  In
  order to be found to have violated this section, a person must
  intentionally participate in the preparation or dissemination of false
  campaign material that the person knows is false or communicates with
  reckless disregard as to whether it is false.  The Complaint alleged that
...
> The Minnesota Supreme Court has observed that the prohibition against
  false campaign material is “directed against the evil of making false
  statements of fact” and not against criticisms or unfavorable deductions
...
  statement is false.  Moreover, Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 prohibits the
  dissemination of false campaign material with respect to the “effect” of a
  ballot question.  The Complainants failed to establish how this statement,

=======================================
638417629.rt.doc         8-6384-17629-2  More;
=======================================
...   Page  1
  Administrative Hearings alleging that the Respondent prepared and
  disseminated false campaign material in violation of Minnesota Statutes §
  211B.06.  Attached to the Complaint was a copy of a page from the
...
  Complaint that the Respondent violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 by preparing
  and disseminating false campaign material is taken as true and is deemed
  proved without further evidence.  The allegation is hereby incorporated
...
 
  Complainant.  The standard of proof of a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  06, relating to false campaign material, is clear and convincing evidence.
 
...
  Administrative Law Judges therefore takes the allegation set out in the
  Complaint that the Respondent prepared and disseminated false campaign
  material in violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 as true and deemed proved.
 
...
  the allegation in the Complainant that the Respondent violated Minn. Stat
  . § 211B.06 by preparing and disseminating false campaign material was
  deemed proved without further evidence.

=========================================
638116267.rt.doc         22-6381-16304-CV  More;
=========================================
...   Page  1
 
> The City of Grant (either “Grant” or “the City”) is a municipal
...
  time and now it’s time to pay.”
...
  that the Respondent Gary Erichson intentionally participated in the
  preparation and dissemination of false campaign material.
> In their disclaimers, Flyers One, Two, and Three indicated that they had
...
  involved the same election in the City of Grant.  But in Levitz, the
  Respondent was responsible for city-wide distribution of false campaign
  material and therefore bore responsibility for all of the impact that the
  campaign material had on the outcomes of the election.  This Panel

============================================
636116947.fdg.rt.doc         7-6361-16947-CV  More;
============================================
...   Page  1
 
> False Campaign Material   Parks and Open Spaces
> In January of 2005, the City of Maplewood undertook a redevelopment
...
  this from happening.”
> False Campaign Material   Number of Patrol Officers
> The campaign flyer that MFA prepared and distributed in mid-October of
...
  Maplewood as MFA’s new mailing address.
...
  Complainant.  The standard of proof of a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  06, relating to false campaign material, is clear and convincing evidence.
  The standard of proof as to all other violations is preponderance of the
...
> MEMORANDUM
> False Campaign Material
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 prohibits the preparation or dissemination of false
  campaign material that refers to the personal or political character or
  acts of a candidate.  In order to be found to have violated this section,
  a person must intentionally participate in the preparation or
  dissemination of false campaign material that the person knows is false or
  communicates with reckless disregard as to whether it is false.  The

=======================================================
635516591.rt.doc         No prima facie violation found  More;
=======================================================
...   Page  1
 
> Did Respondent violate Minn. Stat. § 211B.06, which prohibits the
  dissemination of false campaign material?
> The panel concludes that Respondent did not violate Minn. Stat. § 211B.06.
...

==============================================
632616910.fdg.rt.doc         Fine v. Bernstein  More;
==============================================
...   Page  1
 
  Complainant.  The standard of proof of a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  06, relating to false campaign material, is clear and convincing evidence.
  The standard of proof as to all other violations is preponderance of the
...
> MEMORANDUM
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 prohibits the preparation and dissemination of false
  campaign material.  In order to be found to have violated this section, a
  person must intentionally participate in the preparation and dissemination
  of false campaign material that the person knows is false or communicates
  with reckless disregard as to whether it is false.  Complainant alleges

==========================================
632616886.fdg.rt.doc         6326-16886-CV  More;
==========================================
...   Page  1
 
> Did Respondent violate Minn. Stat. § 211B.06, by preparing and
  disseminating false campaign material that Respondent knew was false or
  communicated to others with reckless disregard as to whether it was false?
...
 
> Marie Hauser is a candidate for the Minneapolis City Council, Ward 8.  Ms.
...
  Volunteer Committee alleging that they violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 by
  preparing and disseminating false campaign material.
> On October 6, 2005, Administrative Law Judge Beverly Jones Heydinger
...
 
  Complainant.  The standard of proof of a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  06, relating to false campaign material, is clear and convincing evidence.
> The Complainant has failed to show by clear and convincing evidence that

=========================================
632616253.fng.doc         3-6326-16253-CV  More;
=========================================
...   Page  1
  Trepanier rather than hurt him.
...
  Complainant.  The standard of proof for a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  06, relating to false campaign material is proof by clear and convincing
  evidence.  The Complainant has proven by clear and convincing evidence

========================================
632217617.rt.doc         4-6322-17617-CV  More;
========================================
...   Page  1
 
>      Did Respondent violate Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 by intentionally
  participating in the preparation or dissemination of false campaign
  material that Respondent knew was false or communicated to others with
  reckless disregard as to whether it was false?
...
 
> Eric Herendeen is currently the Chief Deputy County Attorney for Mower
...
  and the complaint was dismissed.
...
  Complainant.  The standard of proof of a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  06, relating to false campaign material, is clear and convincing evidence.
> The Complainant has failed to demonstrate that the Respondent violated
...
> MEMORANDUM
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 prohibits the preparation and dissemination of false
  campaign material.  In order to be found to have violated this section, a
  person must intentionally participate in the preparation or dissemination

=========================================================
631816185.final-order.doc         032016053.or finding pf  More;
=========================================================
...   Page  1
 
> Margaret J. Tilley is an incumbent who is seeking re-election as a member
...
 
  disregard of whether it was false.
> Based on the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, and for the reasons
  set forth in the Memorandum, attached hereto and incorporated herein:
...
  Eagan resident named Betty Adelmann.  Minn. Stat. § 211B.06, subd. 1,
  prohibits the intentional preparation or dissemination of false campaign
  material, that the person doing the preparation or dissemination knows is
  false or communicates to others with reckless disregard of whether it is

========================================
631217667.rt.doc         8-6312-17667-CV  More;
========================================
...   Page  1
> In 2006, three candidates filed for two seats on the Wyoming City Council:
...
  Phillips violated Minnesota Statutes §§ 211B.02 (false claim of support),
  211B.04 (improper disclaimer), 211B.06 (false campaign material) and 211B.
  07 (undue influence on voters) in preparing and disseminating the campaign
...
  Council meetings.


=====================================================
631216361.fdg.doc         Campaign Complaint Findings  More;
=====================================================
...   Page  1
> Respondent is a Chisago County Commissioner.  He has served continuously
...
  and prescription drug costs or other health care issues.
> Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, the panel makes the following:
> CONCLUSIONS
...
  Complainant.  The standard of proof of a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  06, relating to false campaign material, is clear and convincing evidence.
> The Complainant has shown by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent
...
> Minnesota Statutes § 211B.06 prohibits the preparation and dissemination
  of false campaign material.  Complainant argues that Respondent prepared
  and distributed campaign material that contained statements that were

=========================================
630116266.fdg.doc         1-6301-16266-CV  More;
=========================================
...   Page  1
> Complainant is a member of the City Council of the City of Andover.  He
...
  distributing the mailer.
> Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, the panel makes the following:
 
...
  Complainant.  The standard of proof of a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  06, relating to false campaign material, is clear and convincing evidence.
  The standard of proof of a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.04, relating to
...
  contained in Erar’s lawsuit complaint.
> Minnesota Statute § 211B.06, prohibits the dissemination of false campaign
  material.  When interpreting the prohibition against false statements in a
  predecessor statute, the Minnesota Supreme Court observed that the statute
...
  total civil penalty of $500.
> With respect to the false campaign material, the panel views ACT’s conduct
  to be ill-considered but not deliberately deceitful.  ACT was careful to

==============================================
032017790.fdg.mbg.doc         15-0320-17790-CV  More;
==============================================  
...   Page  1
 

>      Did Respondents violate Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 by intentionally
  participating in the preparation or dissemination of false campaign
  material that Respondents knew was false or communicated to others with
  reckless disregard as to whether it was false?
...
 
> Terry Sluss is a former Crow Wing County Commissioner (3rd District).  He
...
  Hearings on January 8, 2007.
  Complainant.  The standard of proof of a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  06, relating to false campaign material, is clear and convincing evidence.
> The Complainant has failed to demonstrate that the Respondents violated
...
> MEMORANDUM
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 prohibits the preparation and dissemination of false
  campaign material.  In order to be found to have violated this section, a
  person must intentionally participate in the preparation or dissemination
...
  position prior to publishing.  The Respondents are only prohibited from
  intentionally preparing or disseminating false campaign material.  However,
  because the panel finds that the statement at issue is not false, it is

==========================================
032017530.rt..doc         15-0320-17530-CV  More;
==========================================
...   Page  1
 
>      Did Respondent violate Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 by intentionally
  participating in the preparation or dissemination of false campaign
  material that Respondent knew was false or communicated to others with
  reckless disregard as to whether it was false?
...
 
> Melissa Hortman is a member of the Minnesota State House of
...
  Hearings on September 22, 2006.
>    Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, the panel makes the
  following:
...
  Complainant.  The standard of proof of a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  06, relating to false campaign material, is clear and convincing evidence.
> The Complainant has failed to demonstrate that the Respondent violated
...
> MEMORANDUM
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 prohibits the preparation and dissemination of false
  campaign material.  In order to be found to have violated this section, a
  person must intentionally participate in the preparation or dissemination
  of false campaign material that the person knows is false or communicates
  with reckless disregard of whether it is false.

========================================= 
032017447.fdg.doc         7-0320-17447-CV  More;
=========================================
...   Page  1
 
>      Did Respondents violate Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 by intentionally
  participating in the preparation or dissemination of false campaign
  material that Respondents knew was false or communicated to others with
  reckless disregard as to whether it was false?
...
 
> Respondent Carla Nelson served one term (2002-2004) as State
...
  campaign material false in violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.06.
>   Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact, the panel makes the following:
 
...
  Complainant.  The standard of proof of a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  06, relating to false campaign material, is clear and convincing evidence.
> The Complainant has failed to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence
...
  they used the word with reckless disregard as to whether it was false.
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 prohibits the preparation and dissemination of false
  campaign material.  In order to be found to have violated this section, a
  person must intentionally participate in the preparation or dissemination
  of false campaign material that the person knows is false or communicates
  with reckless disregard of whether it is false.

==========================
032017388.fdg.doc         More;
==========================
...   Page  1
 
>      Did Respondents violate Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 by intentionally
  participating in the preparation or dissemination of false campaign
  material that Respondents knew was false or communicated to others with
  reckless disregard as to whether it was false?
...
 
> The Complainant is a candidate for Minnesota Senate District 28.
...
  Committee.
  Complainant.  The standard of proof of a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  06, relating to false campaign material, is clear and convincing evidence.
> The Complainant has failed to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence
...
> MEMORANDUM
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 prohibits the preparation and dissemination of false
  campaign material.  In order to be found to have violated this section, a
  person must intentionally participate in the preparation or dissemination
  of false campaign material that the person knows is false or communicates
  with reckless disregard of whether it is false.
...
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.06, subd. 1, makes it a crime to participate knowingly
  in the preparation or dissemination of false campaign material that is
  designed or tends to elect, injure, promote, or defeat a candidate for
...
  at the convention.  There may be some need to shield the mass of voters at
  large from the unfair advantage of knowingly false campaign material, but
  there is no such need where the recipients of the possibly false material

=============================================
032016574.dism.or.doc         6-0320-16574-CV  More;
=============================================
...   Page  1
  Complaint alleges violations of Minn. Stat. § 211B.06, which prohibits
  false political advertising and false campaign material.  The Complaint
  alleges that a letter sent by Peppin’s Campaign Manager, Katie Nadeau,
...
  in the October 17, 2004, letter that is at issue in this proceeding.
>      The facts behind the letter are set forth in detail in the Findings
  of Fact, Conclusions, Order and Memorandum issued by the three-judge panel
  in Lindsay I.  Basically, a Lindner campaign volunteer, Daniel Jaeger,

=========================================
032016264.fdg.doc         7-0320-16264-CV  More;
=========================================
...   Page  1
 
> On or about Thursday, October 21, 2004, Dax Bennett, an employee (or
...
  Globe did not run anything until after the election.
...
  Complainant.  The standard of proof of a violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.
  06, relating to false campaign material, is clear and convincing evidence.
> The Complainant has shown by clear and convincing evidence that the HRCC

==========================================
032016254.fdg.doc         12-0320-16254-CV  More;
==========================================
...   Page  1
 
> The events described below occurred during the campaign for State
...
> The Complainant alleges that two statements in the October 17, 2004 letter,
  set out at Findings of Fact Nos. 16 and 17, are false.
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.06, subd. 1 provides as follows:
...
  considered by the panel.
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.06 prohibits the preparation and dissemination of false
  campaign material.  In order to be found to have violated this section, a
  person must participate in the preparation or dissemination of false
  campaign material that the person knows is false or communicates with
  reckless disregard of whether it is false.  Here, Ms. Nadeau concedes that

	 



=====================================================
630116405.fdg.doc         Campaign Complaint Findings  More;
=====================================================
...   Page  1
> Both Respondents Peterson and Williams admitted that they failed to list
  on their campaign financial report the money they paid to Bruce Nedegaard
  for allowing them to place their campaign signs on his corporate

==============================================
632617585.dism.ord.doc         8-6326-17585-CV  More;
==============================================
...   Page  1
  kind donations valued at over $750 and have violated Minnesota Statutes §
  211A.02 by failing to file the required financial report.  To support this
  allegation, the Complainant points out that Cindy Notch stated in an email
...
  750 threshold for both contributions and expenditures, Respondents filed a
  campaign financial report documenting these amounts on October 21, 2006.
  Finally, the Respondents testified that supporters of CCS have volunteered
...
  concludes that the Complainant has failed to present sufficient facts to
  support her claim that the Respondents failed to timely file a financial
  report in violation of Minnesota Statutes § 211A.02.
> Much of the dispute as to the timeliness of CCS’ financial reporting,

=========================================
632616253.fng.doc         3-6326-16253-CV  More;
=========================================
...   Page  1
  and 2000 had a double digit increase in either the levy rate or the actual
  tax revenue, by providing data taken from Brooklyn Park’s Annual Financial
  Report establishing that there was no percentage tax increase in those
  years higher than 7.2%.  This data was presented in the pages appended to

=============================================
032017509.rt.mbg.doc         11-0320-17509-CV  More;
=============================================
...   Page  1
  corporate contribution or had any knowledge that one may have been made
  until the August 2006 financial report was prepared.  Once alerted to the
  possibility that the campaign had received a corporate contribution, the

	 


=========================================
032016229.fdg.doc         3-0320-16229-CV  More; 
=========================================
...   Page  1
  that part of the spectrum one runs into substantive Due Process vagueness
  problems, First Amendment speech problems, or both.  Second, Minn. Stat. §
  211B.06 provides, in part:

==========================================
032016254.fdg.doc         12-0320-16254-CV   More; 
==========================================
...   Page  1
  investigate or verify the accuracy of third party information.  The case
  law indicates that, due to First Amendment concerns, no such duty exists.
  Ms. Nadeau’s conduct in disseminating the false statement may have been

==============================================
032017434.DISM.OR.doc         11-0320-17434-CV  More; 
==============================================
...   Page  1
  Riley v. Jankowski, holding that the disclaimer requirement of Minn. Stat
  . § 211B.04 violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by
  directly regulating the content of pure speech and that there is no way to

==============================================================
630116266.probcause.smm.doc         630116266.probcause.or.smm  More; 
==============================================================
...   Page  1
  . §§ 211B.04 and 211B.06 have been held by the courts to infringe upon
  First Amendment rights of free speech and anonymous political comment.  In
  light of those court decisions and because such information was not

========================================================
630216119.ord.doc         No prima facie violation found    More; 
========================================================
...   Page  1
  disclaimer requirements of Minn. Stat. § 211B.04 (2003) to be a facial
  violation of the First Amendment and has enjoined the state from enforcing
  the statute.  In that case, Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, Inc. v.
...
  overriding interest supporting the statute, the court found that Minn.
  Stat. § 211B.04 was unconstitutional under the First Amendment.
> The state did not appeal that decision.  The legislature amended section
...
  requiring candidates to be accountable for the materials they distribute
  violates the First Amendment.  Since the constitutional concerns addressed
  in MCCL have no clear application to candidates themselves, and given the

================================================
630216119.Prob.Cause.doc         3-6302-16119-CV    More; 
================================================
...   Page  1
  Court for the District of Minnesota declared the disclaimer requirements
  of Minn. Stat. § 211B.04 (2003) to be a facial violation of the First
  Amendment and enjoined the state from enforcing the statute.  The state
  did not appeal this decision.  The legislature amended the statute during

========================================
631217667.or.doc         8-6312-17667-CV   More; 
========================================
...   Page  1
  that the state may properly regulate and circumscribe without violating
  the First Amendment.  When enacting Minnesota Statutes § 211B.07, the
  Minnesota Legislature was operating within its rightful police powers to
...
  conduct, such as “fighting words” or “true threats” does not implicate the
  First Amendment ..."); compare also, United States v. Bellrichard, 62 F.3d
  1046, 1050 (8th Cir. 1995) (“the First Amendment affords no protection to
  those who utter direct threats of force and violence toward other persons”).
>  Compare generally, Dunham, at 567 (Minnesota's harassment statute was
  found to be constitutional against a First Amendment challenge, where the
  statute required both objectively unreasonable conduct on the part of the

====================================================
631217667.primafacie.ord.doc         8-6312-17667-CV  More; 
====================================================
...   Page  1
> However, earlier this year, the Minnesota Court of Appeals ruled that the
  disclaimer requirement of Minnesota Statutes § 211B.04 violates the First
  Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  The Court of Appeals held that the
  disclaimer requirement directly regulated the content of pure speech and

========================================
631217667.rt.doc         8-6312-17667-CV  More; 
========================================
...   Page  1
> The Respondent also argued that Minn. Stat. § 211B.07 unconstitutionally
  infringes on his First Amendment right of free speech.  As noted in the
  panel’s prior Order denying Respondent’s motion for summary disposition,
  the state may properly regulate and circumscribe categories of speech,
  such as “fighting words” or “true threats,” without violating the First
  Amendment.  It appears that the Minnesota Legislature was operating within
  its rightful police powers when it enacted Section 211B.07, by punishing
...
  conduct, such as “fighting words” or “true threats” does not implicate the
  First Amendment ..."); compare also, United States v. Bellrichard, 62 F.3d
  1046, 1050 (8th Cir. 1995) (“the First Amendment affords no protection to
  those who utter direct threats of force and violence toward other persons”).

==============================================
632617585.dism.ord.doc         8-6326-17585-CV  More; 
==============================================
...   Page  1
  statements of fact, not criticisms or unfavorable deductions.”  Indeed,
  this statute is set against the backdrop of the First Amendment, which
  assures Americans in the public square   and also, on the World Wide Web
...
  communicated them with reckless disregard as to whether they were false.
  Gloomy, incomplete, or not   the Notches have a First Amendment right to
  disseminate the calculations that they have developed in good faith.  The
...
  to provide adequate ’breathing space’ to the freedoms protected by the
  First Amendment”); compare also, State v. Machholz, 574 N.W.2d 415, 422 (
  Minn. 1998) ("Commenting on matters of public concern is a classic form of
  speech that lies at the heart of the First Amendment, and speech in public
  arenas is at its most protected on public sidewalks, a prototypical

=========================================
632617627.or.doc         15-6326-17627-CV  More; 
=========================================
...   Page  1
  04 is unconstitutional on its face.  The Court held that the Section 211B.
  04’s disclaimer requirement violates the First Amendment of the U.S.
  Constitution by directly regulating the content of pure speech and that

=============================================
632917227.DISM.OR.doc         3-6329-17227-CV  More; 
=============================================
...   Page  1
  Riley v. Jankowski, holding that the disclaimer requirement of Minn. Stat
  .           § 211B.04 violates the First Amendment of the U.S.
  Constitution by directly regulating the content of pure speech and that

=============================================
634917443.DISM.OR.doc         4-6349-17433-CV  More; 
=============================================
...   Page  1
  Stat. § 211B.06.  It would seem that at some point along that part of the
  spectrum one runs into substantive Due Process vagueness problems, First
  Amendment speech problems, or both.
> Second, unlike some statutory schemes, neither Chapter 211B nor Minn. Stat

====================================================
637817388.primafacie.ord.doc         3-6378-17388-CV   More; 
====================================================
...   Page  1
  Riley v. Jankowski, holding that the disclaimer requirement of Minn. Stat
  . § 211B.04 violates the First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution by
  directly regulating the content of pure speech and that there is no way to

===========================================
638517588.disor.doc         8-6385-17588-CV  More; 
===========================================
...   Page  1
  of Appeals issued its decision in Riley v. Jankowski, holding that the
  disclaimer requirement of Minn. Stat. § 211B.04 violates the First
  Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.  Because the Minnesota Court of
  Appeals has determined that Minn. Stat. § 211B.04 is unconstitutional on

		                 

	 



=================================================================
630216119.reconsid.ord.doc         No prima facie violation found   More; 
=================================================================
...   Page  1
  candy along the parade route.  The issue presented in this case is whether
  the tossing of “penny candy” to the crowds along the parade routes is
  conduct amounting to bribery and prohibited under Minn. Stat. § 211B.13.
...
  is to prove workable in today’s political climate.  Complainant argues
  that penny candy has monetary value and its monetary value is expressed
  directly by the name given it, i.e. “penny “ candy.  According to
  Complainant, the statute should be interpreted strictly and as an absolute

================================================
630216119.Prob.Cause.doc         3-6302-16119-CV   More; 
================================================
...   Page  1
  bands, beauty pageant contestants, and approximately 75 to 100 floats
  advertising local businesses.  Persons on most of the floats threw penny
  candy to children lined up to watch the parade, which was 0.6 of a mile in
  length.  Mr. Knutson’s family threw candy as well, although he did not.
...
 
>      Mr. Knutson contends that tossing penny candy to children from a
  float in a parade cannot constitute bribery by any definition.  Ms. Kalil

========================================================
630216119.ord.doc         No prima facie violation found   More; 
========================================================
...   Page  1
  truck, which was identified with Mr. Knutson’s name and the office he
  seeks, and members of Mr. Knutson’s family tossed penny candy to children
  along the parade route.

=====================================================
032017816.primafacie.ord.doc         12-0320-17816-CV   More; 
=====================================================
...   Page  1
  is a question of fact.  In prior decisions, Administrative Law Judges have
  held that tossing penny candy at a parade and giving notepads imprinted
  with the candidate’s name and office did not violate Minn. Stat. § 211B.13,

	 

============================================
636116947.fdg.rt.doc         7-6361-16947-CV  More;
============================================
...   Page  1
  regularly scheduled to work 14 hours or more per week, MFA was informed it
  was prohibited from negotiating pay or benefits under the Public Employee
  Labor Relations Act.  Finally, the panel concludes that the fact that

================================================ 
632619653.primafacie.doc         3-6326-19653-CV  More;
================================================
...   Page  1
  Superintendent Karen Orcutt violated Minn. Stat. §§ 211A.02, 211A.05, 211B.
  06 and 211B.09 (prohibited public employee activities).  Lastly, the
  Complaint alleges that the organization “Orono Kids Matter” violated Minn.
...
  members and Superintendent Orcutt violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.09 (
  prohibited public employee activities).
> In reviewing the Complaint to determine whether it sets forth a prima

===============================================
632616253.pcfinding.doc         3-6326-16253-CV  More;
===============================================
...   Page  1
  provided a copy of his resignation letter, dated May 25, 2001, in which he
  states that he resigned after receiving advice from the Public Employee
  Retirement Association (PERA) that service on the council would negatively

=========================================
632616253.fng.doc         3-6326-16253-CV  More;
=========================================
...   Page  1
  service on the Council in 1996.  His resignation letter of May 25, 2001
  indicates he resigned after receiving advice from the Public Employee
  Retirement Association (PERA) that service on the Council would impact

===============================================
032017564.dismissal.doc         3-0320-17564-CV  More;
===============================================
...   Page  1
  Trooper; it names the Republican Party of Minnesota.  Because Section 211B.
  09 is directed against prohibited public employee activities, the
  Complaint must be dismissed.  The Republican Party of Minnesota is not an

===============================================
032016236.dismissal.doc         1-0320-16236-CV  More;
===============================================
...   Page  1
  Representatives in District 55A.  The Complaint alleges this was a
  violation because a public employee required a child to engage in
  political activity in violation of state law.
         
	   

	 


===========================================
638517601.pf.or.doc         3-XXXX-XXXXX-CV  More;
===========================================
...   Page  1
  threatening force, coercion, violence, restraint, damage, harm, loss,
  including loss of employment or economic reprisal, undue influence, or
  temporal or spiritual injury against an individual to compel the

====================================================
638417728.primafacie.ord.doc         3-6384-17728-CV  More;
====================================================
...   Page  1
  211B.05 (paid advertisements in news), 211B.06 (false campaign material)
  and 211B.07 (undue influence on voters).  After reviewing the Complaint
  and attached exhibits, the undersigned Administrative Law Judge has
...
  advertisement, the Respondent violated Minnesota Statutes § 211B.07.  Minn.
  Stat. § 211B.07 prohibits undue influence on voters and provides as
  follows:
...
  violence, restraint, damage, harm, loss, including loss of employment or
  economic reprisal, undue influence, or temporal or spiritual injury
  against an individual to compel the individual to vote for or against a
...
  Complainant, however, the claim fails.  Because the Complainant has failed
  to allege sufficient facts to support his claim of undue influence, the
  allegation that Respondent violated Minn. Stat. § 211B.07 is dismissed.

=============================================================
638119135.primafacie.ord.doc         Campaign Complaint Order  More;
=============================================================
...   Page  1
  Statutes
  §§ 211B.06 (false campaign material) and 211B.07 (undue influence on
  voters).  The Complaint also alleged that, as a result of these violations,
...
  contrary to Minn. Stat. § 211B.07.
> Minnesota Statutes § 211B.07 prohibits undue influence on voters and
  provides as follows:
...
  violence, restraint, damage, harm, loss, including loss of employment or
  economic reprisal, undue influence, or temporal or spiritual injury
  against an individual to compel the individual to vote for or against a
...
  restraint, damage, harm, loss, including loss of employment or economic
  reprisal, undue influence, or temporal or spiritual injury against an
  individual to compel the individual to vote against Mr. Stegner.  At most,

==============================================
638119135.fees.OR.doc         11-6381-19135-CV  More;
==============================================
...   Page  1
  Administrative Hearings alleging that the Respondents violated Minnesota
  Statutes §§ 211B.06 (false campaign material) and 211B.07 (undue influence
  on voters).  The Complaint also alleged that, as a result of these
...
  alleging that the Respondents violated Minnesota Statutes §§ 211B.06 (
  false campaign material) and 211B.07 (undue influence on voters).  The
  Complaint alleged that during the course of the 2006 mayoral campaign, the

=====================================================
636717991.primafacie.ord.doc         12-6367-17991-CV  More;
=====================================================
...   Page  1
  Administrative Hearings alleging that Chancy Cole Jr. violated Minn. Stat
  . § 211B.07 (undue influence on voters) and Minn. Stat. § 609.43 (
  misconduct of public officer or employee).  After reviewing the Complaint,
...
  to normal if he was elected” to the Township Board.  The Complaint alleges
  that the Respondent was using or threatening to use coercion or undue
  influence against an individual to compel the individual to vote for him
  in violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.07 and Minn. Stat. § 609.43.
...
  Respondent violated Minn. Stat. § 609.43 is dismissed.
> Minnesota Statutes § 211B.07 prohibits undue influence on voters and
  provides as follows:
...
  violence, restraint, damage, harm, loss, including loss of employment or
  economic reprisal, undue influence, or temporal or spiritual injury
  against an individual to compel the individual to vote for or against a
...
  preponderance of the evidence that the Respondent used or threatened
  coercion or undue influence to compel the resident to vote for him, those
  facts would establish a violation of Minnesota Statutes § 211B.07.

====================================================
632617585 primafacie ord.doc         8-6326-17585-CV  More;
====================================================
...   Page  1
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.07 and Minn. Stat. § 211B.13
> Allegations 45 and 47:  Undue Influence of Voters
> Minn. Stat. § 211B.07 prohibits a person from using threats or undue
  influence to compel an individual to vote for or against a ballot question
  .  Minn. Stat. § 211B.13 prohibits a person from offering something of

========================================
631217667.rt.doc         8-6312-17667-CV  More;
========================================
...   Page  1
  coercion, violence, restraint, damage, harm, loss, including loss of
  employment or economic reprisal, or undue influence to compel voters to
  vote for him, or against the Complainant, in the November 7, 2006, general
...
  211B.04 (improper disclaimer), 211B.06 (false campaign material) and 211B.
  07 (undue influence on voters) in preparing and disseminating the campaign
  flyer.
...
  violence, restraint, damage, harm, loss, including loss of employment or
  economic reprisal, undue influence, or temporal or spiritual injury
  against an individual to compel the individual to vote for or against a
...
> The Complainant has demonstrated that the Respondent threatened coercion,
  harm, loss, reprisal, or undue influence to compel individuals to vote for
  him or against Mr. Menne.
...
> MEMORANDUM
> Minnesota Statutes § 211B.07 prohibits undue influence on voters and
  provides, in part:
...
  violence, restraint, damage, harm, loss, including loss of employment or
  economic reprisal, undue influence, or temporal or spiritual injury
  against an individual to compel the individual to vote for or against a
...
> The issue before the panel is whether the language of Mr. Phillips’ flyer
  constitutes a threat of coercion, harm, loss, reprisal, or undue influence
  made to compel voters to vote for Mr. Phillips and against Mr. Menne.
...
  speech that threatens “force, coercion, violence, restraint, damage, harm,
  loss, including loss of employment or economic reprisal …  [or] undue
  influence ….”  In any event, a facial challenge to the constitutionality
  of the statute is beyond the scope of this hearing; because such

====================================================
631217667.primafacie.ord.doc         8-6312-17667-CV  More;
====================================================
...   Page  1
  Statutes §§ 211B.02 (false claim of support), 211B.04 (improper disclaimer
  ), 211B.06 (false campaign material) and 211B.07 (undue influence on
  voters).  After reviewing the Complaint and attached exhibits, the
...
 
> Minnesota Statutes § 211B.07 prohibits undue influence on voters and
  provides as follows:
...
  violence, restraint, damage, harm, loss, including loss of employment or
  economic reprisal, undue influence, or temporal or spiritual injury
  against an individual to compel the individual to vote for or against a

========================================
631217667.or.doc         8-6312-17667-CV  More;
========================================
...   Page  1
  Phillips violated Minn. Stat. §§ 211B.02 (false claim of support), 211B.04 (
  improper disclaimer), 211B.06 (false campaign material) and 211B.07 (undue
  influence on voters) in preparing and disseminating certain campaign
  flyers.  By way of an Order dated November 27, 2006, Presiding
...
  of US in the city and that will not go unnoticed in the future.  THANK YOU.
> Minnesota Statutes § 211B.07 prohibits undue influence on voters and
  provides, in part:
...
  violence, restraint, damage, harm, loss, including loss of employment or
  economic reprisal, undue influence, or temporal or spiritual injury
  against an individual to compel the individual to vote for or against a
...
> On January 18, 2007, the Respondent, Mr. Phillips, filed a motion for
  summary disposition.  Phillips argues that the remaining undue influence
  claim fails because Menne cannot establish that Phillips made the alleged
  threats with “actual malice,” or that Phillips “subjectively believed
  these statements [would] … cause undue influence amongst the voters.”
> Summary disposition is analogous to summary judgment.  Summary disposition
...
> The only surviving claim in this matter is whether the flyers distributed
  by Mr. Phillips included a threat of harm, reprisal, or undue influence
  made to compel voters to vote for him or against Mr. Menne.  For that
...
  harm, loss, including loss of employment or economic reprisal …  [or]
  undue influence ….”
> To the extent that Phillips suggests that Menne must establish that
...
  threatened force, coercion, violence, damage, harm, loss, reprisal, or
  undue influence to compel voters to vote for him, or against the
  Complainant, in violation of Minnesota Statutes § 211B.07.

====================================================
631217667.evidentiary.or.doc         8-6312-17667-CV  More;
====================================================
...   Page  1
  211B.02 (false claim of support), 211B.04 (disclaimer), 211B.06 (false
  campaign material) and 211B.07 (undue influence on voters).
  Administrative Law Judge Eric Lipman reviewed the Complaint, and by Order

=============================================
631117633.DISM.OR.doc         4-6311-17633-CV  More;
=============================================
...   Page  1
  violence, restraint, damage, harm, loss, including loss of employment or
  economic reprisal, undue influence, or temporal or spiritual injury
  against an individual to compel the individual to vote for or against a

==============================================
630119304.DISM.OR.doc         12-6301-19304-CV  More;
==============================================
...   Page  1
  violence, restraint, damage, harm, loss, including loss of employment or
  economic reprisal, undue influence, or temporal or spiritual injury
  against an individual to compel the individual to vote for or against a
...
  Complainant must put forward facts that would support finding the
  Respondents used or threatened “undue influence” to “compel” a person to
  vote for a ballot question.  “Undue influence” has been defined to mean:
> coercion, amounting to a destruction of one’s free will, by means of
...
  Complainant has failed to allege sufficient facts to support finding the
  Respondents used “undue influence” to compel voters to support the ballot
  initiative in violation Minn. Stat. § 211B.07.
...
  violence, restraint, damage, harm, loss including loss of employment or
  economic reprisal, or undue influence to compel a person to vote for or
  against a ballot question.  The conduct alleged in the Complaint does not
  come within the spirit or the letter of the statute, and cannot reasonably
  be characterized as “undue influence.”  Instead, the Complainant alleges
  only that the Respondents used their public office and positions of
...
  violation of Minn. Stat. § 211B.07.   Distributing a flyer and speaking at
  a public forum does not amount to using undue influence to compel persons
  to vote for a ballot question.

================================================================
630116290.pf.dismissal.doc         No prima facie violation found  More;
================================================================
...   Page  1
  violence, restraint, damage, harm, loss, including loss of employment or
  economic reprisal, undue influence, or temporal or spiritual injury
  against an individual to compel the individual to vote for or against a

==============================================================
630116282.primafacie.doc         No prima facie vilation found  More;
==============================================================
...   Page  1
  violence, restraint, damage, harm, loss, including loss of employment or
  economic reprisal, undue influence, or temporal or spiritual injury
  against an individual to compel the individual to vote for or against a

==============================================
032017434.DISM.OR.doc         11-0320-17434-CV  More;
==============================================
...   Page  1
> Finally, the Complaint fails to allege a prima facie violation of Minn.
  Stat. § 211B.07.  This section prohibits undue influence on voters and
  provides as follows:
...
  violence, restraint, damage, harm, loss, including loss of employment or
  economic reprisal, undue influence, or temporal or spiritual injury
  against an individual to compel the individual to vote for or against a
...
  failed to update the website.  The statute, however, prohibits the use of
  coercion or undue influence to compel an individual “to vote for or
  against a candidate.”  The Complainant has failed to allege any facts that

===================================================
032016254.probcausefdg.smm.doc         032016254.pc  More;
===================================================
...   Page  1
  against either Lindner or Peppin.  Complainant argued that the statute
  should be read broadly to also prohibit indirect undue influence.  That
  position must be rejected.  Minn. Stat. § 211B.07 is a punitive statute