Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Bustad v. Bustad, 116 N.W.2d 552.

28 citing documents.

MJ Property Holdings, LLC d/b/a Midwest Ethanol, LLC, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
(explaining that summary judgment “is intended to secure 8 a just, speedy, and inexpensive disposition.
Shields Law Group, LLC, Spencer Shields v. Gustafson Gluek PLLC, Watts ... Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Shields Law Group, LLC, Spencer Shields v. Gustafson Gluek PLLC, Watts ... Minn. Ct. App. 2026
James L. Lang, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
CSM Equities, LLC v. Woodland Village Investments Limited Partnership Minn. Ct. App. 2016
CSM Equities, LLC v. Woodland Village Investments Limited Partnership Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Bustad v. Bustad, 263 Minn. 238, 242, (emphasis added) (quotation omitted).
Michael Alan Mooney v. UnitedHealth Group Incorporated, Stephen L. Hemsley, William W. McGuire, David J. Lubben Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Michael Alan Mooney v. UnitedHealth Group Incorporated, Stephen L. Hemsley, William W. McGuire, David J. Lubben Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“‘[T]he facts constituting the fraud are deemed to have been discovered when, with reasonable diligence, they could and ought to have been discovered.’” Bustad v. Bustad, 263 Minn. 238, 242, (quoting First Nat’l Bank of Shakopee v. Strait, 71 Minn. 69, 72, 73 N.W.
Doe v. Archdiocese of Saint Paul & Minneapolis 817 N.W.2d 150 Minn. 2012
Doe v. Archdiocese of Saint Paul & Minneapolis 817 N.W.2d 150 Minn. 2012
Bustad v. Bustad, 263 Minn. 238, 242
Buller v. A.O. Smith Harvestore Products, Inc. 518 N.W.2d 537 Minn. 1994
Buller v. A.O. Smith Harvestore Products, Inc. 518 N.W.2d 537 Minn. 1994
See Bustad v. Bastad, 263 Minn. 238
Estate of Jones Ex Rel. Blume v. Kvamme 449 N.W.2d 428 Minn. 1989
Estate of Jones Ex Rel. Blume v. Kvamme 449 N.W.2d 428 Minn. 1989
Bustad v. Bustad, 263 Minn. 238, 243-44
ESTATE OF JONES BY BLUME v. Kvamme 430 N.W.2d 188 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
ESTATE OF JONES BY BLUME v. Kvamme 430 N.W.2d 188 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
In Bustad v. Bustad, 263 Minn. 238, 242 , the court said: [T]he facts constituting the fraud are deemed to have been discovered when, with reasonable diligence, they could and *194 ought to have been discovered.
Kassan v. Kassan 400 N.W.2d 346 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Kassan v. Kassan 400 N.W.2d 346 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
In Bustad v. Bustad, 263 Minn. 238 , the Minnesota Supreme Court reaffirmed Mr. Justice Mitchell’s construction of the statute: [T]he facts constituting the fraud are deemed to have been discovered when, with reasonable diligence, they could and ought to have been discovered.
Blegen v. Monarch Life Insurance Co. 365 N.W.2d 356 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Blegen v. Monarch Life Insurance Co. 365 N.W.2d 356 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Statute of Limitations “The applicable statute of limitation, section 541.05(6), provides that actions shall be commenced within six years ‘[f]or relief on the ground of fraud, in which case the cause of action shall not be deemed to have accrued until the discovery by the aggrieved party of the facts constituting the fraud.’ ” Bustad v. Bustad, 263 Minn. 238
Ahlm v. Rooney 143 N.W.2d 65 Minn. 1966
Ahlm v. Rooney 143 N.W.2d 65 Minn. 1966
Sauter v. Sauter, supra; Bustad v. Bustad, 263 Minn. 238, 244 , 116 N. W. (2d) 552, 556 .
Willmore v. Willmore 143 N.W.2d 630 Minn. 1966
Willmore v. Willmore 143 N.W.2d 630 Minn. 1966
Lindgren v. Sparks, 239 Minn. 222 , 58 N. W. (2d) 317 ; Schoening v. United States Aviation Underwriters, Inc. 265 Minn. 119 , 120 N. W. (2d) 859 ; Bustad v. *544 Bustad, 263 Minn. 238 , 116 N. W. (2d) 552 ; Minneapolis, St.
Scott-Peabody & Associates v. Northern Leasing Corp. 140 N.W.2d 614 Minn. 1966
Scott-Peabody & Associates v. Northern Leasing Corp. 140 N.W.2d 614 Minn. 1966
Schoening v. United States Aviation Underwriters, 265 Minn. 119 , 120 N. W. (2d) 859 ; Bustad v. Bustad, 263 Minn. 238 , 116 N. W. (2d) 552 .
Bennett v. Storz Broadcasting Co. 134 N.W.2d 892 Minn. 1965
Bennett v. Storz Broadcasting Co. 134 N.W.2d 892 Minn. 1965
In Bustad v. Bustad, 263 Minn. 238, 244 , 116 N. W. (2d) 552, 556 , we said: “Under Rule 56.03 of Rules of Civil Procedure, the trial court may not order summary judgment unless the pleadings, depositions, affidavits, and other portions of the record show there is no genuine issue as to any material fact, and that the moving party is entitled to judgme

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by