Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Sommers v. Thomas, 88 N.W.2d 191.

87 citing documents.

Reliant Loan Servicing, LLC, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(“[I]t is clear that a strong inference of irregularity concerning the entire proceeding could properly have been drawn.
Don Magnuson, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(“It must be remembered that the goal of all litigation is to bring about judgments after trials on the merits and for this reason courts should be liberal in opening default judgments.”).
City of Elk River v. Bolton & Menk, Inc., Vessco, Inc., Schwing Bioset ... Minn. 2024
City of Elk River v. Bolton & Menk, Inc., Vessco, Inc., Schwing Bioset ... Minn. 2024
A district court abuses its discretion when it acts under a “misapprehension of the law.” (quoting Sommers v. 6 Thomas, ).
Bradley Lewis, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
In re the Marriage of: Brenda Anne Kiberu-Kalema, n/k/a/ Brenda Anne Kiberu, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Minnesota caselaw stat es, “[r]eopening of default judgments is to be liberally undertaken so that disputes can be resolved on their merits.” Galatovich v. Watson , ; see also Sommers v. Thomas , (“It must be remembered that the goal of all litigation is to bring about judgments after trials on the merits and for this reason courts should be liberal in opening default judgments.”).
Buck Blacktop, Inc. v. Gary Contracting and Trucking Company, LLC 929 N.W.2d 12 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Buck Blacktop, Inc. v. Gary Contracting and Trucking Company, LLC 929 N.W.2d 12 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Sommers v. Thomas , 251 Minn. 461 , , 195 (1958) (discussing rule 60.02(6), predecessor of rule 60.02(f) ).
Mary Brown, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Sommers v. Thomas , -96 (Mi nn.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Margaret MacCallum and Antimo Veneziale, individually, and as assignees of James S. Poyser and Ashley E. Poyser (Bystrom) … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Margaret MacCallum and Antimo Veneziale, individually, and as assignees of James S. Poyser and Ashley E. Poyser (Bystrom) … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
A district court abuses its discretion if it “has acted under a misapprehension of the law,” Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 469, –97 (1958), or if its “reasons are based on facts not supported by the record.” Northland Temps., d at 402–03.
Ferdinand Leo Gams, Jr., Respondent/Cross-Appellant v. Steven Ronald Houghton, Appellant/Cross-Respondent. 884 N.W.2d 611 Minn. 2016
Ferdinand Leo Gams, Jr., Respondent/Cross-Appellant v. Steven Ronald Houghton, Appellant/Cross-Respondent. 884 N.W.2d 611 Minn. 2016
A district court abuses its discretion when it acts under a “misapprehension of the law,” Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 469, or when its factual findings are “clearly erroneous,” Roehrdanz, d at 631.
S. Robideau Construction, Inc. v. John E. Hiber, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
S. Robideau Construction, Inc. v. John E. Hiber, Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
A district court abuses its discretion if it “‘act[s] under a misapprehension of the law’” or if its decision is “based on facts not supported by the record.” Northland Temporaries, –03 (Minn. App. 2008) (quoting Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 469, –97 (1958)), review denied (Minn. Apr.
Rebecca J. Adams, John Crudele v. James Koch, Steve Hyland, Erik Ostigaard, Greg Bohnsack Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Rebecca J. Adams, John Crudele v. James Koch, Steve Hyland, Erik Ostigaard, Greg Bohnsack Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[T]he supreme court has held that, ‘if the [district] court has acted under a misapprehension of the law,’ the decision will be reversed on appeal even though the opening of a default judgment ‘lies almost wholly within the sound discretion of the [district] court.’” Northland Temps., (quoting Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 469, -97 (1958), review denied (Minn. Apr.
Lyon Financial Services, Inc., d/b/a U.S. Bancorp Business Equipment Finance Group with its principal offices at Marshall, Minnesota … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Lyon Financial Services, Inc., d/b/a U.S. Bancorp Business Equipment Finance Group with its principal offices at Marshall, Minnesota … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(quoting Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 469, -97 (1958)).
Gassler v. State 787 N.W.2d 575 Minn. 2010
Palladium Holdings, LLC v. Zuni Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-OA1 775 N.W.2d 168 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Palladium Holdings, LLC v. Zuni Mortgage Loan Trust 2006-OA1 775 N.W.2d 168 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
(quoting Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 469 , -97 (1958)).
Langston v. Wilson McShane Corp. 758 N.W.2d 583 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Langston v. Wilson McShane Corp. 758 N.W.2d 583 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
If the district court “has acted under a misapprehension of the law,” the decision will be reversed on appeal even though the opening of a default judgment “lies almost wholly within the sound discretion of the trial court.” Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 469 , -97 (1958).
Northland Temporaries, Inc. v. Turpin 744 N.W.2d 398 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Northland Temporaries, Inc. v. Turpin 744 N.W.2d 398 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Finally, the supreme court has held that, “if the trial court has acted under a misapprehension of the law,” the decision will be reversed on appeal even though the opening of a default judgment “lies almost wholly within the sound discretion of the trial court.” Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 469 , -97 (1958).
City of Barnum v. Sabri 657 N.W.2d 201 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
City of Barnum v. Sabri 657 N.W.2d 201 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Id.; Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 467
Ramsey County v. Suggs 653 N.W.2d 458 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Ramsey County v. Suggs 653 N.W.2d 458 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
No. 1, (citation omitted); see also Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 466-67 , -96 (1958).
Bode v. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 612 N.W.2d 862 Minn. 2000
Bode v. Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 612 N.W.2d 862 Minn. 2000
We interpreted this phrase in Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 466 , -96 (1958).
Kemmerer v. State Farm Insurance Companies 513 N.W.2d 838 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Kemmerer v. State Farm Insurance Companies 513 N.W.2d 838 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
See Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 466-67 , -96 (1958) (“reasonable time” is determined on case-by-case basis).
Chapman v. Special School District No. 1 454 N.W.2d 921 Minn. 1990
Chapman v. Special School District No. 1 454 N.W.2d 921 Minn. 1990
Simons v. Schiek’s, Inc., 275 Minn. 132, 138 , Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 467
Western Lake Superior Sanitary District v. Interpace Corp. 454 N.W.2d 449 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Western Lake Superior Sanitary District v. Interpace Corp. 454 N.W.2d 449 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
See Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 467
Hovelson v. U.S. Swim & Fitness, Inc. 450 N.W.2d 137 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Hovelson v. U.S. Swim & Fitness, Inc. 450 N.W.2d 137 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 466-67
Zetah v. Isaacs 428 N.W.2d 96 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Zetah v. Isaacs 428 N.W.2d 96 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 467
Petrich v. Dyke 419 N.W.2d 833 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Petrich v. Dyke 419 N.W.2d 833 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
We remind the trial court that the goal of all litigation “is to bring about judgments after trials on the merits.” Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 468
Galatovich v. Watson 412 N.W.2d 758 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Galatovich v. Watson 412 N.W.2d 758 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
While it would have been more compelling had there been a strong showing on the reasonable excuse factor “[i]t must be remembered that the goal of all litigation is to bring about judgments after trials on the merits.” Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 468
Marriage of Clay v. Clay 397 N.W.2d 571 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Clay v. Clay 397 N.W.2d 571 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 466-67
Haukland v. Peterson 396 N.W.2d 79 Minn. Ct. App. 1986