Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Parrish v. Peoples, 9 N.W.2d 225.

27 citing documents.

Michael Robin, Relator v. BHSI LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Michael Robin, Relator v. BHSI LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2014
See, e.g., Parrish v. Peoples, 214 Minn. 589, 597, d 225, 229 (1943) (discussing capacity in context of probate law); -96 (Minn. App. 2003) (discussing capacity in context of contract law).
In re the Guardianship of O'Brien 847 N.W.2d 710 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Guardianship of O'Brien 847 N.W.2d 710 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Any limitation on a ward’s right to marry must therefore be supported by findings focused specifically on whether “a person clearly is incapacitated with respect to choosing a spouse,” Mikulanec, d at 688 (emphasis added); cf. Parrish v. Peoples, 214 Minn. 589, 596-97 , (“[I]f grantor or testator knows and understands the nature and effect of his act, he has sufficient capacity to enable him to dispose of his property”) (quotation omitted).
State v. Provost 490 N.W.2d 93 Minn. 1992
Marriage of Lindsey v. Lindsey 369 N.W.2d 26 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Marriage of Lindsey v. Lindsey 369 N.W.2d 26 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Parrish v. Peoples, 214 Minn. 589, 595
Juster Steel v. Carlson Companies 366 N.W.2d 616 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Juster Steel v. Carlson Companies 366 N.W.2d 616 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Joseph’s Hospital, 301 Minn. 493 , Parrish v. Peoples, 214 Minn. 589
Krueger v. Zoch 173 N.W.2d 18 Minn. 1969
Krueger v. Zoch 173 N.W.2d 18 Minn. 1969
See, also, Parrish v. Peoples, 214 Minn. 589 , 9 N. W. (2d) 225 .
O'BRIEN v. Kemper 149 N.W.2d 487 Minn. 1967
O'BRIEN v. Kemper 149 N.W.2d 487 Minn. 1967
Alho v. Sterling, 266 Minn. 71 , Parrish v. Peoples, 214 Minn. 589 , ” The court took the position that when the fraud allegation of the purported responsive pleading was stricken nothing remained in the answer and counterclaim except the admission of the execution and nonpayment of the note sued upon and that plaintiff’s motion for judgment on the pleadings was
Alho v. Sterling 122 N.W.2d 869 Minn. 1963
Alho v. Sterling 122 N.W.2d 869 Minn. 1963
It is apparent that were the matter to be presented on the merits, it would be governed by our decisions in Parrish v. Peoples, 214 Minn. 589 , 9 N. W. (2d) 225 , and Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288 , 290, 69 N. W. (2d) 667 , 670.
Crea v. Hall 122 N.W.2d 610 Minn. 1963
Crea v. Hall 122 N.W.2d 610 Minn. 1963
Authorities cited by plaintiff include Podgorski v. Kerwin, 147 Minn. 103 , ; Amland v. Grose, 208 Minn. 596 , ; Parrish v. Peoples, 214 Minn. 589 , 9 N. W. (2d) 225 ; In re Estate of Liberopulos, 245 Minn. 553 , 73 N. W. (2d) 607 ; and H. P. Droher & Sons v. Toushin, 250 Minn. 490 , 85 N. W. (2d) 273 .
Routh v. Routh 97 N.W.2d 644 Minn. 1959
Routh v. Routh 97 N.W.2d 644 Minn. 1959
(3 ed.) § 7143; Carlson v. Fredsall, 228 Minn. 461 , 37 N. W. (2d) 744 ; Parrish v. Peoples, 214 Minn. 589 , 9 N. W. (2d) 225 .
Royal Realty Co. v. Levin 69 N.W.2d 667 Minn. 1955
Royal Realty Co. v. Levin 69 N.W.2d 667 Minn. 1955
3 Parrish v. Peoples, 214 Minn. 589 , ; 8 Dunnell, Dig.
Bethany Fellowship, Inc. v. Murk 68 N.W.2d 585 Minn. 1955
Bethany Fellowship, Inc. v. Murk 68 N.W.2d 585 Minn. 1955
Parrish v. Peoples, 214 Minn. 589 , 9 N. W. (2d) 225 ; 14 Dunnell, Dig.
Wolff v. Lerum 44 N.W.2d 465 Minn. 1950
Wolff v. Lerum 44 N.W.2d 465 Minn. 1950
It is, however, largely a question of fact based upon the opinion of the trier of facts before whom the proceeding comes, Parrish v. Peoples, 214 Minn. 589 , 9 N. W. (2d) 225 , and we should not disturb such finding on appeal unless it is obvious that there is no evidence reasonably tending to support it.
Rebne v. Rebne 13 N.W.2d 18 Minn. 1944
Rebne v. Rebne 13 N.W.2d 18 Minn. 1944
& Supp. § 1731; Parrish v. Peoples, 214 Minn. 589 , 9 N. W. (2d) 225 ; Trost v. Brey, 156 Minn. 242 , ; Rogers v. Central L. & I. Co. 149 Minn. 347 , .