DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

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

87 citing documents.

  • Haukland v. Peterson 396 N.W.2d 79 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    11, 1985) (citing Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461 , ).
  • Qualy v. MacDonald 395 N.W.2d 423 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • Qualy v. MacDonald 395 N.W.2d 423 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461 , , 195 *426 (1958).
  • Volkman v. Volkman 394 N.W.2d 869 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • Volkman v. Volkman 394 N.W.2d 869 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 466-67 , (footnote omitted).
  • Grover v. Rilea 388 N.W.2d 766 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • Grover v. Rilea 388 N.W.2d 766 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461 , cited by the trial court, does state that “relief may not be had under clause (6) when the grounds for granting it fall properly under clauses (1), (2), or (3), to which the one-year limitation applies.” See also Anderson v. Anderson, 288 Minn. 514, 518 , (“Rule 60.02
  • Lemkau v. Fout 385 N.W.2d 418 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • Lemkau v. Fout 385 N.W.2d 418 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    The Minnesota Supreme Court noted the expansive nature of clause (6) in Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461
  • Marriage of Carlson v. Carlson 371 N.W.2d 591 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • Marriage of Carlson v. Carlson 371 N.W.2d 591 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461
  • Spicer v. Carefree Vacations, Inc. 370 N.W.2d 424 Minn. 1985
  • Spicer v. Carefree Vacations, Inc. 370 N.W.2d 424 Minn. 1985
    See also Thayer v. American Financial Advisers, Inc., Taylor v. Steinke, 295 Minn. 244 , Finden v. Klaas, 268 Minn. 268 , Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461 , In re Application of Bonley, 213 Minn. 214 , Barrie v. Northern Assurance Co., 99 Minn. 272 , 109 N.W.
  • In Re the Welfare of C.A.N. 370 N.W.2d 438 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • In Re the Welfare of C.A.N. 370 N.W.2d 438 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    See Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461
  • Grunke v. Kloskin 355 N.W.2d 207 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • Grunke v. Kloskin 355 N.W.2d 207 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    Taylor v. Steinke, 295 Minn. 244, 246 , (quoting Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 468 , ).
  • MacKenzie v. Belisle 338 N.W.2d 33 Minn. 1983
  • MacKenzie v. Belisle 338 N.W.2d 33 Minn. 1983
    Rules 55.01(1) and 55.02 permit the clerk of the district court to enter judgment against a nonappearing plaintiff without notice to that plaintiff when the defendant’s counterclaim against the plaintiff “is upon a contract for the payment of money only.” 6 In Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 465 , this court stated that Rule 55.01(1) was applicable when the contract was one in which “the exact amount of money owing to the [non-defaulting party] was ascertainable without any resort to trial.” M
  • 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
    Koloski v. Jones, supra; Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461
  • State Bank of Morristown v. Labs 275 N.W.2d 37 Minn. 1979
  • State Bank of Morristown v. Labs 275 N.W.2d 37 Minn. 1979
    Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 466 , (citing Slater v. Olson, 83 Minn. 35 , 85 N.W.
  • LYON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. Ricke's, Inc. 207 N.W.2d 273 Minn. 1973
  • LYON DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. Ricke's, Inc. 207 N.W.2d 273 Minn. 1973
    2 Cf. Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461
  • Taylor v. Steinke 203 N.W.2d 859 Minn. 1973
  • Taylor v. Steinke 203 N.W.2d 859 Minn. 1973
    Nevertheless, “[i]t 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.” Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 468
  • R & L Lumber Co. v. Summit Fidelity & Surety Co. 170 N.W.2d 594 Minn. 1969
  • R & L Lumber Co. v. Summit Fidelity & Surety Co. 170 N.W.2d 594 Minn. 1969
    Vrooman Floor Covering Inc. v. Dorsey, 267 Minn. 318 , 126 N. W. (2d) 377 ; Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461 , 88 N. W. (2d) 191 .
  • 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.
  • Simons v. Schiek's, Inc. 145 N.W.2d 548 Minn. 1966
  • Simons v. Schiek's, Inc. 145 N.W.2d 548 Minn. 1966
    Sommers *139 v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461 , 88 N. W. (2d) 191 .
  • Newman v. Fjelstad 137 N.W.2d 181 Minn. 1965
  • Newman v. Fjelstad 137 N.W.2d 181 Minn. 1965
    The motion shall be made within a reasonable time, and for reasons (1), (2), (3) not more than one year after the judgment, order, or proceeding was entered or taken.” Mr. Chief Justice Dell in the case of Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461, 466 , 88 N. W. (2d) 191, 195 , involving the vacation of a default judgment under this rule, said: “Clause (6) is couched in very broad terms.
  • Osterhus v. King Construction Co. 107 N.W.2d 526 Minn. 1961
  • Osterhus v. King Construction Co. 107 N.W.2d 526 Minn. 1961
    The court has most recently affirmed this principle in Sommers v. Thomas, 251 Minn. 461 , 88 N. W. (2d) 191 , where it was stated that the improper entry of a default judgment does not render a judgment void.