Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co., 53 N.W.2d 454.

150 citing documents.

Havemeier v. Karlstad Equipment & Farms 406 N.W.2d 581 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Havemeier v. Karlstad Equipment & Farms 406 N.W.2d 581 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
See Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co., 237 Minn. 28 , Hasara v. Swaney, 161 Minn. 94 , 200 N.W.
Lund v. Pan American MacHines Sales 405 N.W.2d 550 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Lund v. Pan American MacHines Sales 405 N.W.2d 550 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co., 237 Minn. 28, 30 , See Sand v. School Service Employees Union, Local 284, (Rule 60.02 relief applies to dismissals under 4th Judicial District special rule of practice requiring dismissal of cases not certified ready for trial by deadline).
Sand v. School Service Employees Union, Local 284 402 N.W.2d 183 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Sand v. School Service Employees Union, Local 284 402 N.W.2d 183 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co., 237 Minn. 28, 30 , -56 (1952).
Valley View, Inc. v. Schutte 399 N.W.2d 182 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Valley View, Inc. v. Schutte 399 N.W.2d 182 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co., 237 Minn. 28, 30, -56 (1952).
WGSH, INC. v. Bollinger 384 N.W.2d 592 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
WGSH, INC. v. Bollinger 384 N.W.2d 592 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co., 237 Minn. 28, 30 , pet.
Hill v. Tischer 385 N.W.2d 329 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Hill v. Tischer 385 N.W.2d 329 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co., 237 Minn. 28, 30 , -56 (1952) (footnote omitted).
Elk River Enterprises, Inc. v. Adams 357 N.W.2d 139 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Elk River Enterprises, Inc. v. Adams 357 N.W.2d 139 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
ANALYSIS Bivens Winchester contends that it is entitled to a new trial because of a strong public policy against default judgments, see Hinz v. Northland Milk and Ice Cream Co., 237 Minn. 28 , and because the absence of attorney representation was due to excusable neglect, see Minn.R.Civ.P.
Grunke v. Kloskin 355 N.W.2d 207 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Grunke v. Kloskin 355 N.W.2d 207 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co., 237 Minn. 28, 30 , -56 (1952)
Thayer v. American Financial Advisers, Inc. 322 N.W.2d 599 Minn. 1982
Thayer v. American Financial Advisers, Inc. 322 N.W.2d 599 Minn. 1982
See, Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co., 237 Minn. 28 , In re Estate of Walker, 183 Minn. 325 , 236 N.W.
Conley v. Downing 321 N.W.2d 36 Minn. 1982
Conley v. Downing 321 N.W.2d 36 Minn. 1982
See Nielsen, Stock & Blackburn v. Financial Acceptance Corp., 299 Minn. 81 , Kosloski v. Jones, 295 Minn. 177 , Taylor v. Steinke, 295 Minn. 244 , Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co., 237 Minn. 28 , D. McFarland & W. Keppel, supra, at 72.
Coller v. Guardian Angels Roman Catholic Church of Chaska 294 N.W.2d 712 Minn. 1980
Coller v. Guardian Angels Roman Catholic Church of Chaska 294 N.W.2d 712 Minn. 1980
See, e. g., Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co., 237 Minn. 28 , Unowsky v. Snow, 161 Minn. 489 , 201 N.W.
Wessels v. Swanson 289 N.W.2d 469 Minn. 1979
Wessels v. Swanson 289 N.W.2d 469 Minn. 1979
Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co., 237 Minn. 28
MINN. VIKINGS FOOTBALL CLUB v. Metro. Council 289 N.W.2d 426 Minn. 1979
MINN. VIKINGS FOOTBALL CLUB v. Metro. Council 289 N.W.2d 426 Minn. 1979
Hinz v. Northland Milk and Ice Cream Co., 237 Minn. 28
First National Bank of Hopkins v. Trzecinski 264 N.W.2d 411 Minn. 1978
First National Bank of Hopkins v. Trzecinski 264 N.W.2d 411 Minn. 1978
This court set forth the four criteria to be employed by the trial court upon a motion to vacate a default judgment in Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co., 237 Minn. 28
Thompson v. Spring Lake Township 257 N.W.2d 388 Minn. 1977
Thompson v. Spring Lake Township 257 N.W.2d 388 Minn. 1977
This court has enumerated the factors which must be established prior to the granting of a motion to vacate a default judgment in Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co., 237 Minn. 28
Hengel v. Hyatt 252 N.W.2d 105 Minn. 1977
Hengel v. Hyatt 252 N.W.2d 105 Minn. 1977
Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co. 237 Minn. 28
Pedersen v. Daly 238 N.W.2d 620 Minn. 1976
Pedersen v. Daly 238 N.W.2d 620 Minn. 1976
The standards for review of an order denying vacation of a default judgment are set forth in Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co. 237 Minn. 28, 30 , where we said: “* * * [I]t is the duty of the trial court, in furthering justice by adopting a liberal policy conducive to the trial of causes on their merits, to grant a motion to open a default judgment and permit a party to answer, if the party in default shows that he (a) is poss
Nielsen, Stock & Blackburn v. Financial Acceptance Corp. of Minnesota, Inc. 216 N.W.2d 693 Minn. 1974
Nielsen, Stock & Blackburn v. Financial Acceptance Corp. of Minnesota, Inc. 216 N.W.2d 693 Minn. 1974
discretion to be exercised in such cases is invoked upon a showing that the party in default “(a) is possessed of a reasonable defense on the merits, (b) has reasonable excuse for his failure to neglect to answer, (c) has acted with due diligence after notice of the entry of judgment, and (d) that no substantial prejudice will result to the other party.” Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co. 237 Minn. 28, 30
Kosloski v. Jones 203 N.W.2d 401 Minn. 1973
Kosloski v. Jones 203 N.W.2d 401 Minn. 1973
e defense on the merits, (b) has a reasonable excuse for his failure or neglect to answer, (c) has acted with due diligence after notice of the entry of judgment, and (d) shows that no substantial prejudice will result to the other party, Finden v. Klaas, 268 Minn. 268 , ; Johnson v. Nelson, 265 Minn. 71 , Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co. 237 Minn. 28
Eckerly v. LAKE REGION SIGN COMPANY 148 N.W.2d 158 Minn. 1967
Eckerly v. LAKE REGION SIGN COMPANY 148 N.W.2d 158 Minn. 1967
Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461 , 88 N. W. (2d) 191 ; Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co. 237 Minn. 28 , 53 N. W. (2d) 454 ; Standard Oil Co. v. King, 238 Minn. 81 , 55 N. W. (2d) 710 ; Rodgers v. United States & Dominion Life Ins.
Finden v. Klaas 128 N.W.2d 748 Minn. 1964
Finden v. Klaas 128 N.W.2d 748 Minn. 1964
4 Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co. 237 Minn. 28, 30 , 53 N. W. (2d) 454, 456 ; Johnson v. Nelson, 265 Minn. 71, 73 , 120 N. W. (2d) 333, 335 .
Johnson v. Nelson 120 N.W.2d 333 Minn. 1963
Johnson v. Nelson 120 N.W.2d 333 Minn. 1963
l discretion to be exercised in such cases is envoked by a showing that the party in default “(a) is possessed of a reasonable defense on the merits, (b) has reasonable excuse for his failure or neglect to answer, (c) has acted with due diligence after notice of the entry of judgment, and (d) that no substantial prejudice will result to the other party.” Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co. 237 Minn. 28, 30 , 53 N. W. (2d) 454, 456 .
Tousley v. Howe 116 N.W.2d 590 Minn. 1962
Tousley v. Howe 116 N.W.2d 590 Minn. 1962
Exley v. Berryhill, 36 Minn. 117 , (which clearly recognizes that relief may be granted on condition); Brown v. Brown, 37 Minn. 128 , ; Baxter v. Chute, 50 Minn. 164 , ; Lentz v. Lutz, 215 Minn. 230 , 9 N. W. (2d) 505 ; Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co. 237 Minn. 28 , 53 N. W. (2d) 454 ; Standard Oil Co. v. King, 238 Minn. 81 , 55 N. W. (2d) 710 (where the discretionary power of the court to reopen is ably set forth).
Sommers v. Thomas 88 N.W.2d 191 Minn. 1958
Sommers v. Thomas 88 N.W.2d 191 Minn. 1958
14 Standard Oil Co. v. King, 238 Minn. 81, 83 , 55 N. W. (2d) 710, 712 ; Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co. 237 Minn. 28, 30 , 53 N. W. (2d) 454, 456 .
Standard Oil Co. v. King 55 N.W.2d 710 Minn. 1952
Standard Oil Co. v. King 55 N.W.2d 710 Minn. 1952
As recently stated by this court in Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co. 237 Minn. 28, 30 , 53 N. W. (2d) 454 , 455: “In the exercise of a sound judicial discretion, under § 544.32, it is the duty of the trial court, in furthering justice hy adopting a *83 liberal policy conducive to the trial of causes on their merits, to grant a motion to open a default judgment and permit a party to answer, if the p