Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Knutson v. Lasher, 18 N.W.2d 688.

35 citing documents.

Sustainable 9, LLC d/b/a Sustainable 9 Design + Build, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
A property owner’s right to reduce a mechanic’s lien award because of defective improvements “is one of recoupment, not counterclaim.”
David Schindele, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“Whether a contractor has substantially performed and the amount of damages occasioned by omissions and defects are fact questions.” d 688, 694 (Minn. 1945).
Distinctive Design Build, LLC v. Thomas Nelson, Installed Building Solutions II, LLC, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Distinctive Design Build, LLC v. Thomas Nelson, Installed Building Solutions II, LLC, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
A party’s right to deductions from a lien amount for defects due to faulty performance of the contract is “one of recoupment, not counterclaim,” and, if made, appellate courts will sustain a district court’s findings of “defects and resulting damage,” or lack thereof, so long as the “findings have reasonable support in the evidence.” -94 (1945); see also H.P.
Northern Lines Contracting, Inc., Appellant, vs. Minn. Ct. App. 2023
See N. States Power Co. v. ITT Meyer Indus., 777 F.2d 405, 413 (8th Cir. 1985) (“Minnesota law provides that when a sum certain is due, and that amount may be reduced by an unliquidated setoff, prejudgment interest is allowable on the balance.”); (“The rule is that, where the amount due under a contract is certain and liquidated or capable of ascertainment, but is reduced by an unliquidated setoff, interest is allowable on the balance found to be due.”).
VAN KNIGHT STEEL v. Housing & Redev. Auth. 430 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
VAN KNIGHT STEEL v. Housing & Redev. Auth. 430 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Because A & P poured the concrete for these structures, MPDC asserts that it has potential future claims against A & P. In Knutson v. Lasher, 219 Minn. 594 , the Minnesota Supreme Court held that whether a contractor has substantially performed its obligations and the amount of damages occasioned by omissions and defects are fact questions.
LaValle v. Aqualand Pool Co., Inc. 257 N.W.2d 324 Minn. 1977
LaValle v. Aqualand Pool Co., Inc. 257 N.W.2d 324 Minn. 1977
Knutson v. Lasher, 219 Minn. 594
Sorenson v. Cargill, Inc. 163 N.W.2d 59 Minn. 1968
Sorenson v. Cargill, Inc. 163 N.W.2d 59 Minn. 1968
Knutson v. Lasher, 219 Minn. 594 , 18 N. W. (2d) 688 .
Equipment Advertiser, Inc. v. Harris 136 N.W.2d 302 Minn. 1965
Equipment Advertiser, Inc. v. Harris 136 N.W.2d 302 Minn. 1965
Knutson v. Lasher, 219 Minn. 594 , 18 N. W. (2d) 688 ; Dempsey v. Meighen, 251 Minn. 562 , 90 N. W. (2d) 178 .
Niazi v. St. Paul Mercury Insurance Co. 121 N.W.2d 349 Minn. 1963
Niazi v. St. Paul Mercury Insurance Co. 121 N.W.2d 349 Minn. 1963
If the insurer had participated in and then withdrawn from arbitration proceedings, a waiver might have been found under the rule of Knutson v. Lasher, 219 Minn. 594 , 18 N. W. (2d) 688 .
Dempsey v. Meighen 90 N.W.2d 178 Minn. 1958
Dempsey v. Meighen 90 N.W.2d 178 Minn. 1958
Barnum v. Jefferson, 109 Minn. 1 , ; Knutson v. Lasher, 219 Minn. 594 , 18 Ñ. W. (2d) 688.
Minneapolis Street Railway Co. v. City of Minneapolis 86 N.W.2d 657 Minn. 1957
Minneapolis Street Railway Co. v. City of Minneapolis 86 N.W.2d 657 Minn. 1957
See, Carroll v. Pratt, 247 Minn. 198 , 76 N. W. (2d) 693 ; Knutson v. Lasher, 219 Minn. 594 , 18 N. W. (2d) 688 ; Lovrenchich v. Collins, 233 Minn. 183 , 46 N. W. (2d) 264 .
HP Droher & Sons v. Toushin 85 N.W.2d 273 Minn. 1957
HP Droher & Sons v. Toushin 85 N.W.2d 273 Minn. 1957
The facts in Knutson v. Lasher, 219 Minn. 594 , 18 N. W. (2d) 688 , are similar in many respects to those now before us. In that case we said ( 219 Minn. 603 , 18 N. W. [2d] 694): “* * * the trial court’s findings of defects and resulting damage to defendants must be sustained under the familiar rule that findings having reasonable support in the evidence, even t
Anderson v. Twin City Rapid Transit Co. 84 N.W.2d 593 Minn. 1957
Anderson v. Twin City Rapid Transit Co. 84 N.W.2d 593 Minn. 1957
6 Knutson v. Lasher, 219 Minn. 594 , 18 N. W. (2d) 688 ; Independent School Dist.
Carroll v. Pratt 76 N.W.2d 693 Minn. 1956
Carroll v. Pratt 76 N.W.2d 693 Minn. 1956
1 See, Lovrenchich v. Collins, 233 Minn. 183 , 46 N. W. (2d) 264 ; Knutson v. Lasher, 219 Minn. 594 , 18 N. W. (2d) 688 .
Lehman v. Hansord Pontiac Co. Inc. 74 N.W.2d 305 Minn. 1955
Lehman v. Hansord Pontiac Co. Inc. 74 N.W.2d 305 Minn. 1955
2 Knutson v. Lasher, 219 Minn. 594 , 18 N. W. (2d) 688 ; Zacherl v. Goldberg, 166 Minn. 193 , ; Smith v. Travelers Ins.
STANDARD CONSTRUCTION CO. INC. v. National Tea Co. 62 N.W.2d 201 Minn. 1953
STANDARD CONSTRUCTION CO. INC. v. National Tea Co. 62 N.W.2d 201 Minn. 1953
Knutson v. Lasher, 219 Minn. 594 , 18 N. W. (2d) 688 ; Meiners v. Kennedy, 221 Minn. 6 , 20 N. W. (2d) 539 ; Ehmke v. Hill, 236 Minn. 60 , 51 N. W. (2d) 811 ; 1 Dunnell, Dig.
Lacey v. Duluth, Missabe & Iron Range Railway Co. 51 N.W.2d 831 Minn. 1952
Lacey v. Duluth, Missabe & Iron Range Railway Co. 51 N.W.2d 831 Minn. 1952
Lovrenchich v. Collins, 233 Minn. 183 , 46 N. W. (2d) 264 ; Knutson v. Lasher, 219 Minn. 594 , 18 N. W. (2d) 688 ; Manemann v. West, 216 Minn. 516 , 13 N. W. (2d) 474 .
Lovrenchich v. Collins 46 N.W.2d 264 Minn. 1951
Lovrenchich v. Collins 46 N.W.2d 264 Minn. 1951
Knutson v. Lasher, 219 Minn. 594, 604 , 18 N. W. (2d) 688, 695 ; Manemann v. West, 216 Minn. 516 , 13 N. W. (2d) 474 .
Spurck v. Civil Service Board 42 N.W.2d 720 Minn. 1950
Spurck v. Civil Service Board 42 N.W.2d 720 Minn. 1950
In Knutson v. Lasher, 219 Minn. 594, 606 , 18 N. W. (2d) 688, 696 , we stated the rule to be that— “where the amount due under a contract is certain and liquidated or capable of ascertainment, but is reduced by an unliquidated set-off, interest is allowable on the balance found to be due from' the time it became due or suit was commenced.” By this is me