Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 69 N.W.2d 667.

99 citing documents.

Guerdon Industries, Inc. v. Rose 399 N.W.2d 186 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Guerdon Industries, Inc. v. Rose 399 N.W.2d 186 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288, 292 , Potthoff v. Jefferson Lines, Inc.
Diedrich v. State 393 N.W.2d 677 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Diedrich v. State 393 N.W.2d 677 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
(citing Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288, 290 , ).
Specialized Tours, Inc. v. Hagen 392 N.W.2d 520 Minn. 1986
Specialized Tours, Inc. v. Hagen 392 N.W.2d 520 Minn. 1986
See also Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288, 291 , (false representation must be proximate cause of damages).
Andersen v. Andersen 376 N.W.2d 711 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Andersen v. Andersen 376 N.W.2d 711 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
See Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288
Brakke v. Hilgers 374 N.W.2d 553 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Brakke v. Hilgers 374 N.W.2d 553 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
It is immaterial to our consideration here whether or not the plaintiff can prove the facts alleged.” Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288, 290 , (emphasis supplied).
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
Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288
Furlev Sales & Associates, Inc. v. North American Automotive Warehouse, Inc. 325 N.W.2d 20 Minn. 1982
Furlev Sales & Associates, Inc. v. North American Automotive Warehouse, Inc. 325 N.W.2d 20 Minn. 1982
See Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288
Bouten v. Richard Miller Homes, Inc. 321 N.W.2d 895 Minn. 1982
Bouten v. Richard Miller Homes, Inc. 321 N.W.2d 895 Minn. 1982
We set forth the elements of the tort of intentional interference with contract in Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288 , : Recovery may be had for inducing breach of contract by establishing (1) the existence of a contract; (2) the alleged wrongdoer’s knowledge of the contract; (3) his intentional procurement of its breach; (4) without justification; and (5) damages resulting therefrom.
Schwinn v. Griffith 303 N.W.2d 258 Minn. 1981
Schwinn v. Griffith 303 N.W.2d 258 Minn. 1981
While respondent argues that oral contracts within the statute of frauds are rendered “void,” the recent decisions of this court have made it clear that the word “void” in the statute will be interpreted to mean “voidable.” Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288, 292-94 , -72 (1955); see Greer v. Kooiker, 312 Minn. 499 , 505 n.2, , 138 n.2 (1977);.
Elzie v. Commissioner of Public Safety 298 N.W.2d 29 Minn. 1980
Elzie v. Commissioner of Public Safety 298 N.W.2d 29 Minn. 1980
It is immaterial to our consideration here whether or not the plaintiff can prove the facts alleged.” Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288, 290 , (emphasis supplied).
Malevich v. Hakola 278 N.W.2d 541 Minn. 1979
Malevich v. Hakola 278 N.W.2d 541 Minn. 1979
Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288
Parkside Mobile Estates v. Lee 270 N.W.2d 758 Minn. 1978
Parkside Mobile Estates v. Lee 270 N.W.2d 758 Minn. 1978
Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288
Greer v. Kooiker 253 N.W.2d 133 Minn. 1977
Greer v. Kooiker 253 N.W.2d 133 Minn. 1977
Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288 , Borchardt v. Kulick, 234 Minn. 308, 319
Eberhardt Co. v. Benson 225 N.W.2d 264 Minn. 1975
See, Snowden v. Sorensen, 246 Minn. 526 , and Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288
Atcas v. Credit Clearing Corporation of America 197 N.W.2d 448 Minn. 1972
Atcas v. Credit Clearing Corporation of America 197 N.W.2d 448 Minn. 1972
See, Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288
Beatty v. Winona Housing & Redevelopment Authority 151 N.W.2d 584 Minn. 1967
Beatty v. Winona Housing & Redevelopment Authority 151 N.W.2d 584 Minn. 1967
It may be noted that Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, supra, has been referred to in Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288 , 69 N. W. (2d) 667 , and Grier v. Estate of Grier, 252 Minn. 143 , 89 N. W. (2d) 398 .
Stephenson v. Plastics Corporation of America 150 N.W.2d 668 Minn. 1967
Stephenson v. Plastics Corporation of America 150 N.W.2d 668 Minn. 1967
Snowden v. Sorensen, 246 Minn. 526 , 75 N. W. (2d) 795 ; Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288 , 69 N. W. (2d) 667 .
Formanek v. Langton 134 N.W.2d 883 Minn. 1965
Formanek v. Langton 134 N.W.2d 883 Minn. 1965
Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288 , 69 N. W. (2d) 667 ; Scott v. Marquette Nat.
Bennett v. Storz Broadcasting Co. 134 N.W.2d 892 Minn. 1965
Bennett v. Storz Broadcasting Co. 134 N.W.2d 892 Minn. 1965
718; Berry v. Donovan, supra.” Other cases holding that whether or not there was justification is a fact question are Wolfson v. Northern States Management Co. 210 Minn. 504 , , and Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288 , 69 N. W. (2d) 667 .
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.
Northern States Power Co. v. Franklin 122 N.W.2d 26 Minn. 1963
Northern States Power Co. v. Franklin 122 N.W.2d 26 Minn. 1963
Creamery Co. 243 Minn, 230, *395 67 N. W. (2d) 400 ; Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288 , 69 N. W. (2d) 667 ; Wright, Minnesota Rules, p. 45.
Jensen v. Lundorff 103 N.W.2d 887 Minn. 1960
Jensen v. Lundorff 103 N.W.2d 887 Minn. 1960
Co. 118 Minn. 427 , ; Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288 , 69 N. W. (2d) 667 .
Purdy v. Nordquist 95 N.W.2d 91 Minn. 1959
In Re Estate and Guardianships of Williams 254 Minn. 272 Minn. 1959
Distinguished In Re Estate and Guardianships of Williams 254 Minn. 272 Minn. 1959
(3 ed.) § 3836; Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288 , 69 N.W.
Distinguished Purdy v. Nordquist 95 N.W.2d 91 Minn. 1959
(3 ed.) § 3836; Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288 , 69 N. W. (2d) 667 .
Snowden v. Sorensen 75 N.W.2d 795 Minn. 1956
Snowden v. Sorensen 75 N.W.2d 795 Minn. 1956
Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288, 292 , 69 N. W. (2d) 667, 671 ; Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co. 171 Minn. 260 , , 84 A. L. R. 35.