Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Bergstrom v. Johnson, 126 N.W. 899.

27 citing documents.

ROA Rochester v. City of Byron Minn. Ct. App. 2024
ROA Rochester v. City of Byron Minn. Ct. App. 2024
for the proposition that a party may not claim bona-fide-purchaser status by relying only on the seller’s representations of a third party’s existing property interest.
Amos Graves v. Michael Wayman, First Minnesota Bank 859 N.W.2d 791 Minn. 2015
Graves v. Wayman 816 N.W.2d 655 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Graves v. Wayman 816 N.W.2d 655 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Co., ); see also Bergstrom v. Johnson, 111 Minn. 247, 250 , 126 N.W.
Hentges v. P.H. Feely & Son, Inc. 436 N.W.2d 488 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Hentges v. P.H. Feely & Son, Inc. 436 N.W.2d 488 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Republic National Life Insurance Co. v. Marquette Bank and Trust Co. of Rochester, 312 Minn. 162, 165 , (quoting Bergstrom v. Johnson, 111 Minn. 247, 250 , 126 N.W.
Nunnelee v. Schuna 431 N.W.2d 144 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Nunnelee v. Schuna 431 N.W.2d 144 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
The Minnesota Supreme Court has defined “subsequent purchaser in good faith and for a valuable consideration,” as “one who gives consideration in good faith without actual, implied, or constructive notice of inconsistent outstanding rights of others.” (citing Bergstrom v. Johnson, 111 Minn. 247, 250 , 126 N.W.
Redding v. Oldewartel 411 N.W.2d 231 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Redding v. Oldewartel 411 N.W.2d 231 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
citing Bergstrom v. Johnson, 111 Minn. 247, 250 , 126 N.W.
Anderson v. Graham Investment Co. 263 N.W.2d 382 Minn. 1978
Anderson v. Graham Investment Co. 263 N.W.2d 382 Minn. 1978
Bergstrom v. Johnson, 111 Minn. 247, 250 , 126 N.W.
Republic National Life Insurance v. Marquette Bank & Trust Co. 251 N.W.2d 120 Minn. 1977
Republic National Life Insurance v. Marquette Bank & Trust Co. 251 N.W.2d 120 Minn. 1977
Subsequent Purchaser in Good Faith In Bergstrom v. Johnson, 111 Minn. 247, 250 , we listed the following as the prerequisites to bona fide purchaser status under the recording statute: “* * * (1) the payment of a valuable consideration; (2) good faith, without purpose to take an unfair advantage of third persons; and (3) absence of notice, actual or constructive
Proulx v. Hirsch Bros. Inc. 155 N.W.2d 907 Minn. 1968
Proulx v. Hirsch Bros. Inc. 155 N.W.2d 907 Minn. 1968
Bergstrom v. Johnson, 111 Minn. 247 , .
Goette v. Howe 44 N.W.2d 734 Minn. 1950
Goette v. Howe 44 N.W.2d 734 Minn. 1950
Berg- *174 strom v. Johnson, 111 Minn. 247 , ; Newton v. Newton, 46 Minn. 33 , ; see, 6 Dunnell, Dig.
Faulkenburg v. Windorf 259 N.W. 802 Minn. 1935
Faulkenburg v. Windorf 259 N.W. 802 Minn. 1935
Bergstrom v. Johnson, 111 Minn. 247 , .
Jefferson County Bank v. Erickson 247 N.W. 245 Minn. 1933
Jefferson County Bank v. Erickson 247 N.W. 245 Minn. 1933
49; Bergstrom v. Johnson, 111 Minn. 247 , ; Twitchell v. Glenwood-Inglewood Co. 131 Minn. 375 , ; Brockman v. Brockman, 133 Minn. 148 , ; Swaney v. Crawley, 154 Minn. 263 , ; Lydiard v. Coffee, 167 Minn. 389 , .
Knudson v. Trebesch 187 N.W. 613 Minn. 1922
Knudson v. Trebesch 187 N.W. 613 Minn. 1922
Doescher v. Spratt, 61 Minn. 326 , ; Bergstrom v. Johnson, 111 Minn. 247 , ; Shraiberg v. Hanson, 138 Minn. 80, 85 , ; 3 Dunnell, Minn. Dig.
Murphy v. Anderson 150 N.W. 387 Minn. 1914
Murphy v. Anderson 150 N.W. 387 Minn. 1914
The elements necessary to constitute a good-faith purchase of real estate are discussed and fully explained in Bergstrom v. Johnson, 111 Minn. 247 , , and, under the rules there stated, we tbiuk the facts of the present case imposed upon Rustad the duty to inquire concerning the rights of plaintiff, and that he is chargeable with notice of all facts which sueh inquiry would have disclosed.