Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite First National Bank v. Strait, 73 N.W. 645.

38 citing documents.

Michael Alan Mooney v. UnitedHealth Group Incorporated, Stephen L. Hemsley, William W. McGuire, David J. Lubben Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Michael Alan Mooney v. UnitedHealth Group Incorporated, Stephen L. Hemsley, William W. McGuire, David J. Lubben Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“‘[T]he facts constituting the fraud are deemed to have been discovered when, with reasonable diligence, they could and ought to have been discovered.’” Bustad v. Bustad, 263 Minn. 238, 242, (quoting First Nat’l Bank of Shakopee v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69, 72, 73 N.W.
Kassan v. Kassan 400 N.W.2d 346 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Kassan v. Kassan 400 N.W.2d 346 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
at 242 , d at 555 , citing First Nat’l Bank of Shakopee v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69, 72 , 73 N.W.
Blegen v. Monarch Life Insurance Co. 365 N.W.2d 356 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Blegen v. Monarch Life Insurance Co. 365 N.W.2d 356 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
First National Bank of Shakopee v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69 , 73 N.W.
Bustad v. Bustad 116 N.W.2d 552 Minn. 1962
Bustad v. Bustad 116 N.W.2d 552 Minn. 1962
Bank v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69, 72 , , the court construed the statute in this manner: “The burden was on the plaintiff to prove the fraud, and that it did not discover it until within six years before the death of Horace B. Strait.
Shapiro v. Larson 289 N.W. 48 Minn. 1939
Shapiro v. Larson 289 N.W. 48 Minn. 1939
Bank v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69 , ; First State Bank v. Utman, 136 Minn. 103 , .
Stark v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States 285 N.W. 466 Minn. 1939
Stark v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of United States 285 N.W. 466 Minn. 1939
Bank v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69 , ; Whitcomb v. Wright, 176 Minn. 274 , ; Kuhlman v. Baker, 50 Tex.
Borum v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co. 238 N.W. 4 Minn. 1931
Borum v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co. 238 N.W. 4 Minn. 1931
Bank v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69 , ; Valerius v. Richard, 57 Minn. 443 , ; Alden v. City of Minneapolis, 24 Minn. 254 .
Schmucking v. Mayo 235 N.W. 633 Minn. 1931
Schmucking v. Mayo 235 N.W. 633 Minn. 1931
71 Minn. 69 , ; Weston v. Jones, 160 Minn. 32 , .
Dick v. Piper 229 N.W. 356 Minn. 1930
Dick v. Piper 229 N.W. 356 Minn. 1930
Bank v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69 , ; First State Bank v. Utman, 136 Minn. 103 , .
Erickson v. Bjertness 209 N.W. 32 Minn. 1926
Erickson v. Bjertness 209 N.W. 32 Minn. 1926
Bank v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69 , ; Powers v. Bunnell, 121 Minn. 152 , .
First State Bank v. Utman 161 N.W. 398 Minn. 1917
Followed First State Bank v. Utman 161 N.W. 398 Minn. 1917
Bank of Shakopee v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69 , , is to the contrary and we follow it.
Lankester v. Fine 159 N.W. 622 Minn. 1916
Lankester v. Fine 159 N.W. 622 Minn. 1916
Bank of Shakopee v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69 , top of page 75, , and Dunnell, Minnesota PI.
Lundquist v. Peterson 158 N.W. 426 Minn. 1916
Lundquist v. Peterson 158 N.W. 426 Minn. 1916
Bank of Shakopee v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69 , ; Humphrey v. Carpenter, 39 Minn. 115 , .
Greenhut Cloak Co. v. Oreck 153 N.W. 613 Minn. 1915
Greenhut Cloak Co. v. Oreck 153 N.W. 613 Minn. 1915
Bank of Shakopee v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69 , .
Buck v. Buck 142 N.W. 729 Minn. 1913
Buck v. Buck 142 N.W. 729 Minn. 1913
Bank of Shakopee v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69 , , the court through Mitchell, J. said: “A motion for a new trial on the ground that the verdict is contrary to law is somewhat in the nature of a demurrer to the evidence; that is, conceding all that the evidence tends to prove, the verdict is not supported by the principles of law applicable to the fac
Downer v. Union Land Co. 129 N.W. 777 Minn. 1911
Downer v. Union Land Co. 129 N.W. 777 Minn. 1911
174 ; Duxbury v. Boice, 70 Minn. 113 , ; First National Bank v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69 , ; Schmitt v. Hager, 88 Minn. 413 , .
Montgomery v. Leuwer 102 N.W. 367 Minn. 1905
Montgomery v. Leuwer 102 N.W. 367 Minn. 1905
Bank of Shakopee v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69 , ; Marshall & Ilsley Bank v. Child, 76 Minn. 173, 177 , .
Schmitt v. Hager 93 N.W. 110 Minn. 1903
Schmitt v. Hager 93 N.W. 110 Minn. 1903
Bank of Shakopee v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69 , , was an action for relief on the ground of fraud.
First National Bank v. Strait 78 N.W. 101 Minn. 1899
First National Bank v. Strait 78 N.W. 101 Minn. 1899
MITCHELL, J. This case has already been twice before this court, first in 65 Minn. 162 , , where a verdict for the plaintiff was set aside because of error, in admitting incompetent evidence, and again in 71 Minn. 69 , , where a verdict for the defendant was set aside because of the admission of evidence which was inadmissible under the pleadings.