Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Bengtson v. Setterberg, 35 N.W.2d 623.

26 citing documents.

Meaghan Witthaus, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Indeed, “[i]f a probate court has jurisdiction over a matter, its ruling ‘is not subject to collateral attack.’” Greer v. Professional Fiduciary, Inc., 129, 131 (Minn. App. 2011) ( (holding that the district court did not err by dismissing some of the appellant’s claims because they were an improper collateral attack on a judgment from a different probate court matter, and noting that the appellant could have brought a motion to vacate the underlying order of the probate co
In re the Supervised Estate of: Delbert W Waara, Deceased. Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Doran v. Kennedy, 237 U.S. 362, 368 (1915), d 623, 629 (Minn. 1949) (rejecting collateral attack on a probate distribution and stating that the decree of a probate court is binding “w hether right or wrong” unless reversed or modified on appeal); see also Loo v. Loo , -44 (Minn. 1994) (noting that “the underlying principle that an adjudication o
Farm Bureau Financial Services, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Thomas Sullivan, as guardian and conservator for Marc L. Beeman, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Jean J. Vogt, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
20, 1996); cf. Bengtson v. Setterberg , , 635 (Minn. 1949) (concluding declaratory-judgment action appropriate means to challenge final distribution of estate).
Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC 913 N.W.2d 449 Minn. 2018
Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC 913 N.W.2d 449 Minn. 2018
Bengtson v. Setterberg , 227 Minn. 337 , , 634 (1949).
Laymon v. Minnesota Premier Properties, LLC 903 N.W.2d 6 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Laymon v. Minnesota Premier Properties, LLC 903 N.W.2d 6 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
the date of death of [the decedent]”); Bengtson v. Setterberg, 227 Minn. 337, 359 , (“The title to all real estate vests in the decedent’s heirs or devisees immediately upon his death.”); In re Estate of Freeman, 151 Minn. 446, 449 , 187 N.W.
In the Matter of the Estate of: Rosalie S. Allard, Decedent. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In the Matter of the Estate of: Rosalie S. Allard, Decedent. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
See Minn. Stat. § 524.2-402(a) (providing for probate disposition of homestead property); Bengtson v. Setterberg, 227 Minn. 337, 357-58, (stating that a probate court has jurisdiction over homestead property).
Greer v. Professional Fiduciary, Inc. 792 N.W.2d 120 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Greer v. Professional Fiduciary, Inc. 792 N.W.2d 120 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
If a probate court has jurisdiction over a matter, its ruling “is not subject to collateral attack.” Bengtson v. Setterberg, 227 Minn. 337, 349
Marriage of Nelson v. Quade 413 N.W.2d 824 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Nelson v. Quade 413 N.W.2d 824 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Bengston v. Setterberg, 227 Minn. 337, 346 , -28 (1949).
Spearman v. Salminen 379 N.W.2d 627 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Spearman v. Salminen 379 N.W.2d 627 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
In Bengtson v. Setterberg, 227 Minn. 337 , the supreme court indicated although a declaratory judgment generally cannot be used to collaterally attack a judgment, a party may seek to have the court determine the judgment entered by a court was void.
Matter of Will of Kelly 266 N.W.2d 700 Minn. 1978
Matter of Will of Kelly 266 N.W.2d 700 Minn. 1978
See, Barrett v. MacDonald, 264 Minn. 560 , Bengtson v. Setterberg, 227 Minn. 337
Leslie v. Minneapolis Society of Fine Arts 259 N.W.2d 898 Minn. 1977
Leslie v. Minneapolis Society of Fine Arts 259 N.W.2d 898 Minn. 1977
Bengtson v. Setterberg, 227 Minn. 337 , Greenwood v. Murray, 26 Minn. 259 , 2 N.W.
Reshetar v. Reshetar 246 N.W.2d 846 Minn. 1976
Reshetar v. Reshetar 246 N.W.2d 846 Minn. 1976
As we said in Bengtson v. Setterberg, 227 Minn. 337, 346 , “[r]ights under a decree, when left in doubt, are within the purview of the declaratory judgments act * * *.” Even so, the finding of the district court was not that the original decree extended to the rights and responsibilities of the parties with respect to the Rankin Road house
Kirsch v. Kahn 149 N.W.2d 676 Minn. 1967
Kirsch v. Kahn 149 N.W.2d 676 Minn. 1967
The authorities in support of this principle are fully gathered and discussed in Bengtson v. Setterberg, 227 Minn. 337 , 35N.W.
Schwamm v. Superior Court in and for County of Pima 421 P.2d 913 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966