Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Combined Insurance Co. of America v. Bode, 77 N.W.2d 533.

27 citing documents.

A23-1267 Minn. Ct. App. 2024
see also Milliken & n.1 (Minn. 1980).
A22-1770 In the Matter of the Trust established under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement relating to the Wachovia … Minn. Ct. App. 2024
A22-1770 In the Matter of the Trust established under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement relating to the Wachovia … Minn. Ct. App. 2024
A21-1356 Minn. Ct. App. 2022
v. Bode, ); see also U.S. Bank Nat’l Ass’n v. Angeion Corp., (“Because the indenture contains a choice-of -law clause providing that New York law governs, we apply New York contract law to this dispute.”).
Pamela Maslowski, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Vetter v. Security Continental Insurance Co. 555 N.W.2d 10 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Vetter v. Security Continental Insurance Co. 555 N.W.2d 10 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
v. Bode, 247 Minn. 458, 464 , ).
Hagstrom v. American Circuit Breaker Corp. 518 N.W.2d 46 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Hagstrom v. American Circuit Breaker Corp. 518 N.W.2d 46 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
v. Bode, 247 Minn. 458, 464 , , 380 n. 1 (Minn.1980); pet.
United States Leasing Corp. v. Biba Information Processing Services, Inc. 436 N.W.2d 823 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
United States Leasing Corp. v. Biba Information Processing Services, Inc. 436 N.W.2d 823 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Minnesota is, however, “also committed to the rule that the parties, acting in good faith and without an intent to evade the law, may agree that the law of either state shall govern.” Combined Insurance Co. of America v. Bode, 247 Minn. 458, 464 , (footnote omitted) (express agreement to construe contract according to Illinois law).
Milbank Mutual Insurance Co. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. 332 N.W.2d 160 Minn. 1983
Milbank Mutual Insurance Co. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. 332 N.W.2d 160 Minn. 1983
The trial court’s decision that North Dakota law was applicable was based on its belief that “the law of the state where a contract is made governs construction of the contract.” At one time this was a correct statement of the law, see, e.g., Combined Insurance Co. of America v. Bode, 247 Minn. 458, 463-64
Davies & Davies Agency, Inc. v. Davies 298 N.W.2d 127 Minn. 1980
Davies & Davies Agency, Inc. v. Davies 298 N.W.2d 127 Minn. 1980
Bennett v. Storz Broadcasting Co., 270 Minn. 525 , ; Combined Insurance Co. *132 of America v. Bode, 247 Minn. 458 , Standard Oil Co. v. Bertelson, 186 Minn. 483 , 243 N.W.
Milliken and Co. v. Eagle Packaging Co. 295 N.W.2d 377 Minn. 1980
Milliken and Co. v. Eagle Packaging Co. 295 N.W.2d 377 Minn. 1980
Combined Insurance Co. of America v. Bode, 247 Minn. 458, 464
Cherne Industrial, Inc. v. Grounds & Associates, Inc. 278 N.W.2d 81 Minn. 1979
Cherne Industrial, Inc. v. Grounds & Associates, Inc. 278 N.W.2d 81 Minn. 1979
Co. of America v. Bode, 247 Minn. 458
Alside, Inc. v. Larson 220 N.W.2d 274 Minn. 1974
Distinguished Alside, Inc. v. Larson 220 N.W.2d 274 Minn. 1974
Co. of America v. Bode, 247 Minn. 458
Bennett v. Storz Broadcasting Co. 134 N.W.2d 892 Minn. 1965
Bennett v. Storz Broadcasting Co. 134 N.W.2d 892 Minn. 1965
Co. v. Bode, 247 Minn. 458 , 77 N. W. (2d) 533 .
Ring v. Minnesota Road Builders, Inc. 116 N.W.2d 582 Minn. 1962
Ring v. Minnesota Road Builders, Inc. 116 N.W.2d 582 Minn. 1962
Co. v. Bode, 247 Minn. 458 , 77 N. W. (2d) 533 ; Sitterley v. Gray Co. Inc. 199 Minn. 475 , ; Lucas v. Ganley Bros. Inc. 166 Minn. 7 , .
Naftalin v. John Wood Company 116 N.W.2d 91 Minn. 1962
Naftalin v. John Wood Company 116 N.W.2d 91 Minn. 1962
Co. of America v. Bode, 247 Minn. 458 , 77 N. W. (2d) 533 ; 16 Dunnell, Dig.