DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Hoverson v. Hoverson, 12 N.W.2d 501.

36 citing documents.

  • Mary Ann Karnowski v. Thomas George Wimmer Minn. Ct. App. 2023
  • Mary Ann Karnowski v. Thomas George Wimmer Minn. Ct. App. 2023
  • Bradley v. Bradley 554 N.W.2d 761 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
  • Bradley v. Bradley 554 N.W.2d 761 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
    “Contribution is a creature of equity.” Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 228, 235
  • Perbix v. Hansen 419 N.W.2d 101 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • Perbix v. Hansen 419 N.W.2d 101 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
    (citing Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 228, 235 , ).
  • Andersen v. Andersen 376 N.W.2d 711 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • Andersen v. Andersen 376 N.W.2d 711 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 228, 235
  • Cleys v. Cleys 363 N.W.2d 65 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • Cleys v. Cleys 363 N.W.2d 65 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    See Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 228, 235 , In Re Westerhoff, 688 F.2d 62, 64 (8th Cir.1982).
  • County of Dodge v. Martin 136 N.W.2d 652 Minn. 1965
  • County of Dodge v. Martin 136 N.W.2d 652 Minn. 1965
    Co. v. Gross, 216 Minn. 244 , 12 N. W. (2d) 506 ; Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 228 , 12 N. W. (2d) 501 ; Employers Mutual Cas.
  • Adams v. Johnson 136 N.W.2d 78 Minn. 1965
  • Adams v. Johnson 136 N.W.2d 78 Minn. 1965
    Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 228 , 12 N. W. (2d) 501 , where we affirmed the trial court’s denial of ownership by adverse possession, can be distinguished on the ground that the cotenant in possession in that case himself denied any intent to disseise his cotenants.
  • Koenigs v. Travis 75 N.W.2d 478 Minn. 1956
  • Koenigs v. Travis 75 N.W.2d 478 Minn. 1956
    Co. v. Vigen, 213 Minn. 120 , 5 N. W. (2d) 397 , 142 A. L. R. 722; Restatement, Restitution, §§ 76 to 86; Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 228 , 12 N. W. (2d) 501 ; In re Estate of Moebius, 231 Minn. 219 , 43 N. W. (2d) 104 ; 2 Beach, Modern Equity Jurisprudence, §§ 822, 824; 2 Story, Equity Jurisprudence (14 ed.) §§ 648, 667; Waldref v. Dow, 172 Minn. 52 , ; 18 C. J. S., Contribution, § 3; 13 Am.
  • Swogger v. Taylor 68 N.W.2d 376 Minn. 1955
  • Swogger v. Taylor 68 N.W.2d 376 Minn. 1955
    20 See, Hoerr v. Hoerr, 140 Minn. 223 , , ; Kauffman v. Eckhardt, 195 Minn. 569 , , ; Hunt v. Meeker County Abstract & Loan Co. 135 Minn. 134 , ; Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 228 , 12 N. W. (2d) 501 .
  • American Automobile Insurance v. Molling 57 N.W.2d 847 Minn. 1953
  • American Automobile Insurance v. Molling 57 N.W.2d 847 Minn. 1953
    See, Township of Canosia v. Township of Grand Lake, 80 Minn. 357 , ; Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 228 , 12 N. W. (2d) 501 ; In re Estate of Moebius, 231 Minn. 219 , 43 N. W. (2d) 104 .
  • Gustafson v. Johnson 51 N.W.2d 108 Minn. 1952
  • Gustafson v. Johnson 51 N.W.2d 108 Minn. 1952
    There must be a payment, or such assumption of the demand as imposes upon the claimant more than his share, and a corresponding release against those from whom he claims.” See, also, Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 228 , 12 N. W. (2d) 501 ; Merrimac Min.
  • Schunk v. Hotchkiss 43 N.W.2d 104 Minn. 1950
  • Schunk v. Hotchkiss 43 N.W.2d 104 Minn. 1950
    Co. v. Cross, 216 Minn. 244 , 12 N. W. (2d) 506 ; Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 228 , 12 N. W. (2d) 501 ; 2 Dunnell, Dig.
  • Simpson v. Sheridan 42 N.W.2d 402 Minn. 1950
  • Simpson v. Sheridan 42 N.W.2d 402 Minn. 1950
    The burden of proving the essential facts which create title by adverse possession rests upon the disseizor.” See, also, Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 228 , 12 N. W. (2d) 501 ; St.
  • Tomason v. Wagner 36 N.W.2d 587 Minn. 1949
  • Tomason v. Wagner 36 N.W.2d 587 Minn. 1949
    In Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 228, 235 , 12 N. W. (2d) 501, 505 , this court stated: “* * * While asking reimbursement for these various expenditures (taxes paid, improvements, repairs, personal services and the like furnished), he has made no showing of, in fact has refused to disclose, what the income and profits from the land were during his long p
  • Village of Newport v. Taylor 30 N.W.2d 588 Minn. 1948
  • Village of Newport v. Taylor 30 N.W.2d 588 Minn. 1948
    Paul & Duluth R. Co. v. City of Duluth, 73 Minn. 270 , ; Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 228 , 12 N. W. (2d) 501 ; 1 Dunnell, Dig.
  • Aldrich v. Dunn 14 N.W.2d 489 Minn. 1944
  • Aldrich v. Dunn 14 N.W.2d 489 Minn. 1944
    the full prescriptive period under the assertion of right; and the rule is not affected by the fact that the privilege is claimed by successors in interest of the party to whom the permissive use was originally given.” Our subsequent cases are in full accord: Cf. Johnson v. Olson, supra; State, by Attorney General, v. Riley, 213 Minn. 448, 452 , 7 N. W. (2d) 770, 772, 773 ; Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 228, 232-236 , 12 N. W. (2d) 501, 504-505 .
  • Simms v. Fagan 12 N.W.2d 783 Minn. 1943
  • Simms v. Fagan 12 N.W.2d 783 Minn. 1943
    Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 228 , 12 N. W. (2d) 501 .
  • Hoverson v. Hoverson 12 N.W.2d 497 Minn. 1943
  • Hoverson v. Hoverson 12 N.W.2d 497 Minn. 1943
    This is a companion case to Hoverson v. Hoverson, 216 Minn. 228 , 12 N. W. (2d) 501 .