DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Cahaley v. Cahaley, 12 N.W.2d 182.

27 citing documents.

  • In re the Marriage of: James Warren Huerd, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
    Moir, at 395-96 (reversing denial of motion to vacate default judgment even though respondent in family court failed to appear at a default hearing , failed to file an answer, and fail ed to serve an answer); Cahaley v. Cahaley , 3-85 (Minn. 1943) (reversing denial of motion to vacate default judgment even though respondent failed to appear at a default hearing, failed to file an answer, and failed to serve an answer when petitioner’s attorney had previously agreed to a continuance of the deadli
  • Townsend v. State 646 N.W.2d 218 Minn. 2002
  • Townsend v. State 646 N.W.2d 218 Minn. 2002
    Cahaley v. Cahaley, 216 Minn. 175, 180 , (cautioning that attorneys must therefore act with utmost good faith).
  • Marriage of Glorvigen v. Glorvigen 438 N.W.2d 692 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
  • Marriage of Glorvigen v. Glorvigen 438 N.W.2d 692 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
    Dissolution judgments have been vacated for “fraud upon the court.” See Cahaley v. Cahaley, 216 Minn. 175 , (where counsel for the husband had promised wife an extension of time to answer but then obtained a default judgment); Berg v. Berg, 227 Minn. 173 , (where the wife claimed husband had forced her to stipulate to a default judgment by means of threats of physical harm and by
  • Marriage of Angier v. Angier 415 N.W.2d 53 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • Marriage of Angier v. Angier 415 N.W.2d 53 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    Dissolution judgments have been vacated, for “fraud upon the court.” See Cahaley v. Cahaley, 216 Minn. 175 , (where counsel for the husband had promised wife an extension of time to answer but then obtained a default judgment); Berg v. Berg, 227 Minn. 173 , (where the wife claimed husband had forced her to stipulate to a default judgment by means of threats of physical harm and by
  • Marriage of Moir v. Moir 400 N.W.2d 394 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • Marriage of Moir v. Moir 400 N.W.2d 394 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    In Cahaley v. Cahaley, 216 Minn. 175 , the supreme court considered facts similar to those present here and determined that a vacation of the default dissolution judgment was warranted because there had been a fraud upon the wife and the administration of justice.
  • Marriage of Adams v. Adams 393 N.W.2d 508 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • Marriage of Adams v. Adams 393 N.W.2d 508 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    Cahaley v. Cahaley, 216 Minn. 175, 177 , indicated that the dissolution exclusion was "for the reason that second marriages may occur and the rights of children thereof be affected.” See also Stromsborg v. Stromsborg, 242 Minn. 235, 248 , (that part of the judgment, which relates only to the property
  • Marriage of Schroetke v. Schroetke 365 N.W.2d 380 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • Marriage of Schroetke v. Schroetke 365 N.W.2d 380 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    “Fraud on the court and the administration of justice” in the context of motions to vacate decrees of dissolution has been defined as: [A]ny course of action by the plaintiff which is intended to and does prevent the defendant from setting up and establishing a defense to an action * * * Cahaley v. Cahaley, 216 Minn. 175, 180 , quoting, Young v. Young, 17 Minn. 181, 186 (1871).
  • Swenson v. Swenson 101 N.W.2d 914 Minn. 1960
  • Swenson v. Swenson 101 N.W.2d 914 Minn. 1960
    In Cahaley v. Cahaley, 216 Minn. 175 , 12 N. W. (2d) 182 , 157 A. L. R. 11, relied upon by the defendant, the plaintiff took unfair advantage of an ambiguous extension of time within which to answer, it being well known to plaintiff that the defendant intended to contest the matter.
  • Bredemann v. Bredemann 91 N.W.2d 84 Minn. 1958
  • Bredemann v. Bredemann 91 N.W.2d 84 Minn. 1958
    Cahaley v. Cahaley, 216 Minn. 175 , 12 N. W. (2d) 182 , 157 A. L. R. 1; Berg v. Berg, 227 Minn. 173 , 34 N. W. (2d) 722 .
  • Stromsborg v. Stromsborg 64 N.W.2d 499 Minn. 1954
  • Stromsborg v. Stromsborg 64 N.W.2d 499 Minn. 1954
    2 However, he relies on the case of Cahaley v. Cahaley, 216 Minn. 175 , 12 N. W. (2d) 182 , 157 A. L. R. 1, where this court exercised its inherent power to administer justice and its guardianship over marriage and divorce to relieve a defaulting party from a divorce decree on the grounds that to deny such relief under the circumstances there presented would have resulted in a fraud upo
  • Hafner v. Hafner 54 N.W.2d 854 Minn. 1952
  • Hafner v. Hafner 54 N.W.2d 854 Minn. 1952
    505; Cahaley v. Cahaley, 216 Minn. 175 , 12 N. W. (2d) 182 ,157 A. L. R. 1; Bloomquist v. Thomas, 215 Minn. 35 , 9 N. W. (2d) 337 ; Berg v. Berg, 227 Minn. 173 , 34 N. W. (2d) 722 ; In re Estate of Jordan, 199 Minn. 53 , .
  • Berg v. Berg 34 N.W.2d 722 Minn. 1948
  • Berg v. Berg 34 N.W.2d 722 Minn. 1948
    Cf. Cahaley v. Cahaley, 216 Minn. 175 , 12 N. W. (2d) 182 , 157 A. L. R. 1.
  • Industrial Loan Thrift Corporation v. Swanson 26 N.W.2d 625 Minn. 1947
  • Industrial Loan Thrift Corporation v. Swanson 26 N.W.2d 625 Minn. 1947
    Cahaley v. Cahaley, 216 Minn. 175 , 12 N. W. (2d) 182 , 157 A. L. R. 1.
  • Bentley v. Kral 26 N.W.2d 532 Minn. 1947
  • Bentley v. Kral 26 N.W.2d 532 Minn. 1947
    Cahaley v. Cahaley, 216 Minn. 175 , 12 N. W. (2d) 182 , 157 A. L. R. 1.