DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Engel v. Mahlen, 189 N.W. 422.

30 citing documents.

  • Fogerty v. Rosenwald 391 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • Fogerty v. Rosenwald 391 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    § 287.10 cannot be cancelled for default even though both parties admit the existence of the contract); Engel v. Mahlen, 153 Minn. 1 , 189 N.W.
  • Sheet Metal Workers Local 76 Credit Union v. Hufnagle 295 N.W.2d 259 Minn. 1980
  • Sheet Metal Workers Local 76 Credit Union v. Hufnagle 295 N.W.2d 259 Minn. 1980
    In Engel v. Mahlen, 153 Minn. 1 , 189 N.W.
  • Greer v. Kooiker 253 N.W.2d 133 Minn. 1977
  • Greer v. Kooiker 253 N.W.2d 133 Minn. 1977
    This court set forth the remedies available in the case of an anticipatory breach in Engel v. Mahlen, 153 Minn. 1, 4 , : “* * * It is well settled that where one party repudiates the contract, the other party has an election to pursue one of three remedies: (1) to treat the contract as rescinded and avail himself of the remedies which may be based on a rescission; (2) to treat the contract as still bindin
  • Tarpy v. Nowicki 175 N.W.2d 443 Minn. 1970
  • Tarpy v. Nowicki 175 N.W.2d 443 Minn. 1970
    346, 348 , : “* * * The primary purpose of the statute is to prevent the vendor taking advantage, through a provision in the contract, or otherwise, of the vendee’s failure to make payments on time or of other defaults, and depriving him of his rights in the property without a definite notice of cancellation.” We think the decision of the trial court is supported by Engel v. Mahlen, 153 Minn. 1 , , 7 Minn. L. Rev. 70 ; *263 Halvorson v. Bexell, 157 Minn. 97 , ; and 20 Dunnell, Dig.
  • Bryngelson v. Minnesota Valley Breeders Assn. 114 N.W.2d 748 Minn. 1962
  • Bryngelson v. Minnesota Valley Breeders Assn. 114 N.W.2d 748 Minn. 1962
    Stark v. Magnuson, 212 Minn. 167 , 2 N. W. (2d) 814 ; Engel v. Mahlen, 153 Minn. 1 , ; Kineto Machine Co. v. Ugland, 146 Minn. 44 , ; Restatement, Contracts, § 410, comment b, illustrations 1 and 3.
  • Lof v. Billington 32 N.W.2d 311 Minn. 1948
  • Lof v. Billington 32 N.W.2d 311 Minn. 1948
    This case is controlled by Engel v. Mahlen, 153 Minn. 1 , , wherein the same problem was involved.
  • Kirk v. Welch 3 N.W.2d 426 Minn. 1942
  • Kirk v. Welch 3 N.W.2d 426 Minn. 1942
    Benjamin v. Savage, 154 Minn. 159 , , 35 A. L. R. 97 (payment made during trial, after objection made that contract was not admissible for failure to pay the tax); Engel v. Mahlen, 153 Minn. 1 , .
  • Stark v. Magnuson 2 N.W.2d 814 Minn. 1942
  • Stark v. Magnuson 2 N.W.2d 814 Minn. 1942
    Engel v. Mahlen, 153 Minn. 1 , ; Karbach v. Grant, 131 Minn. 269 , ; see Reynolds v. Franklin, 41 Minn. 279 , .
  • Walsh v. Mankato Oil Co. 275 N.W. 377 Minn. 1937
  • Walsh v. Mankato Oil Co. 275 N.W. 377 Minn. 1937
    Engel v. Mahlen, 153 Minn. 1, 4, 5 , .
  • Bradford v. Doherty 242 N.W. 339 Minn. 1932
  • Bradford v. Doherty 242 N.W. 339 Minn. 1932
    Alger-Fowler Co. v. Tracy, 98 Minn. 432 , ; Engel v. Mahlen, 153 Minn. 1 , ; 2 Dunnell, Minn. Dig.
  • Northern Lumber Co. v. Lundgren 233 N.W. 593 Minn. 1930
  • Northern Lumber Co. v. Lundgren 233 N.W. 593 Minn. 1930
    In Engel v. Mahlen, 153 Minn. 1 , , it was held that one in possession of land under an ordinary land contract and having paid part of the purchase price had not forfeited his rights by failure to make one of the subsequent payments required by the contract.
  • Stadelmann v. Boothroyd 212 N.W. 908 Minn. 1927
  • Stadelmann v. Boothroyd 212 N.W. 908 Minn. 1927
    It is claimed upon authority of Engel v. Mahlen, 153 Minn. 1 , , that defendant thus disqualified himself from carrying out the contract and thereby unqualifiedly repudiated it, relieving plaintiffs of the duty of tendering further performance and giving them the right to rescind and prosecute this action.
  • Halvorson v. Bexell 195 N.W. 635 Minn. 1923
  • Halvorson v. Bexell 195 N.W. 635 Minn. 1923
    Engel v. Mahlen, 153 Minn. 1 , , and cases therein cited.
  • Schultz v. Spicer 191 N.W. 423 Minn. 1923
  • Schultz v. Spicer 191 N.W. 423 Minn. 1923
    It has held that a repudiation of a contract by one of the parties entitles the other to treat the contract as rescinded and avail himself of the remedies which may be based on a rescission, Engel v. Mahlen, 153 Minn. 1 , , and that, if the fraud of oue- party induced the other to enter into the contract, the latter may rescind by his own act and sue at law to recover what he parted with by reason of the fraud.
  • Benjamin v. Savage 191 N.W. 408 Minn. 1923
  • Benjamin v. Savage 191 N.W. 408 Minn. 1923
    This holding is not inconsistent with First State Bank of Boyd v. Hayden, 121 Minn. 45 , , or Engel v. Mahlen, 153 Minn. 1 , , where the holding was that a notice to terminate such a contract given before the payment of the tax is ineffective.