Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Northern States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Products, Inc., 229 N.W.2d 521.

96 citing documents.

August Ventures, LLC a Minnesota limited liability company, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Clearly erroneous findings are those that are “manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” N. States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Prods., Inc., 9
Mary Ann Karnowski v. Thomas George Wimmer Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Mary Ann Karnowski v. Thomas George Wimmer Minn. Ct. App. 2023
v. Lyon Food Products, Inc., ).
Accredited Electrical Solutions, LLC, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Commitment of Kenney, (quoting N. States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Prods., Inc., ).
In re the Guardianship and Conservatorship of Carolyn Neu Minn. Ct. App. 2022
“We will not conclude that a factfinder clearly erred unless, ‘on the entire evidence,’ we are ‘left with a 5 definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.’” ( quoting N. States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Prods., Inc., ).
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment Minn. 2021
We will not conclude that a factfinder clearly erred unless, “on the entire evidence,” we are “left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” N. States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Prods., Inc.
Kevin Chouanard, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
A finding of fact is clearly erroneous if it is “manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” N. States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Prods., Inc.
Saido M. Ali, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
A reviewing court will not disturb the district court’s findings of fact unless, after a review of all of the evidence, the reviewing court “is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” N. States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Prods., Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201
Jennifer L. DeCook, Respondents/Cross-Appellants v. Olmsted Medical Center, Inc., Brenda J. Hanson, R.N., and Darlene M. Pratt, R.N., … 875 N.W.2d 263 Minn. 2016
Samuel Deweese, (A13-2152), (A13-2160) v. Lakeview Clinic, Ltd., (A13-2152), (A13-2160). Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Samuel Deweese, (A13-2152), (A13-2160) v. Lakeview Clinic, Ltd., (A13-2152), (A13-2160). Minn. Ct. App. 2014
A finding of fact is clearly erroneous if it is “manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” N. States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Prods., Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201
In re the Marriage of: Charles A. T. Gill v. Kathryn E. K. Gill Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Marriage of: Charles A. T. Gill v. Kathryn E. K. Gill Minn. Ct. App. 2014
See, e.g., N. States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Prods., Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201, (defining “clearly erroneous” as “manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole”).
O'Brien v. Dombeck 823 N.W.2d 895 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
O'Brien v. Dombeck 823 N.W.2d 895 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
A finding of fact is clearly erroneous if it is “manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” N. States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Prods., Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201
Gada v. Dedefo 684 N.W.2d 512 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Gada v. Dedefo 684 N.W.2d 512 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Rather, to warrant reversal, the district court’s findings must be clearly erroneous or “manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” Rogers, d at 656 (quoting Northern States Power Co. v. Lyon Ford Prods., Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201 , ).
Pioneer Peat, Inc. v. Quality Grassing & Services, Inc. 653 N.W.2d 469 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Pioneer Peat, Inc. v. Quality Grassing & Services, Inc. 653 N.W.2d 469 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Clearly erroneous means “manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” N. States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Prods., Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201
Jasper v. Commissioner of Public Safety 642 N.W.2d 435 Minn. 2002
Jasper v. Commissioner of Public Safety 642 N.W.2d 435 Minn. 2002
We hold findings of fact as clearly erroneous only when we are “left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” In re Improvement of Murray County Ditch No. 34, N. States Power v. Lyon Food Prods., Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201
Estate of Whish v. Bienfang 622 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Estate of Whish v. Bienfang 622 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
(holding that trial court’s factual findings must be clearly erroneous or “manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole” to warrant reversal) (quoting Northern States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Products, Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201 , ).
In Re Improvement of Murray County Ditch No. 34 615 N.W.2d 40 Minn. 2000
In Re Improvement of Murray County Ditch No. 34 615 N.W.2d 40 Minn. 2000
Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201
Rogers v. Moore 603 N.W.2d 650 Minn. 1999
Rogers v. Moore 603 N.W.2d 650 Minn. 1999
Rather, the findings must be “manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” Northern States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Products, Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201
Marriage of Olsen v. Olsen 552 N.W.2d 290 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Milbank Insurance Co. v. Johnson 544 N.W.2d 56 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Milbank Insurance Co. v. Johnson 544 N.W.2d 56 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
We will not reverse a finding of fact unless it is “manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” Northern States Power v. Lyon Food Prods., 304 Minn. 196, 201
Novack v. Northwest Airlines, Inc. 525 N.W.2d 592 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Novack v. Northwest Airlines, Inc. 525 N.W.2d 592 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Clearly erroneous means “manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” Northern States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Prod., Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201
Resolution Trust Corp. v. Independent Mortgage Services, Inc. 519 N.W.2d 478 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Resolution Trust Corp. v. Independent Mortgage Services, Inc. 519 N.W.2d 478 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Clearly erroneous means “manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” Northern States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Prods., 304 Minn. 196, 201 , see also Runia v. Marguth Agency, Inc., (“The standard for review of a bench trial is broader than the standard for jury verdicts.”).
Randall v. Northern Milk Products, Inc. 519 N.W.2d 456 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Randall v. Northern Milk Products, Inc. 519 N.W.2d 456 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201
Benson v. Empire State Bank 516 N.W.2d 550 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Benson v. Empire State Bank 516 N.W.2d 550 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Clearly erroneous means “manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” Northern States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Prods., 304 Minn. 196, 201
Foster v. Bergstrom 515 N.W.2d 581 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Foster v. Bergstrom 515 N.W.2d 581 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201
ESTATE OF JONES BY BLUME v. Kvamme 510 N.W.2d 6 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Olson v. Commissioner of Public Safety 513 N.W.2d 491 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
ESTATE OF JONES BY BLUME v. Kvamme 510 N.W.2d 6 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Clearly erroneous findings are those that are “manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” Northern States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Prods., Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201
Olson v. Commissioner of Public Safety 513 N.W.2d 491 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Clearly erroneous means “manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” Northern States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Prods., Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201
State Ex. Rel. Wacouta Township v. Brunkow Hardwood Corp. 510 N.W.2d 27 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
State Ex. Rel. Wacouta Township v. Brunkow Hardwood Corp. 510 N.W.2d 27 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
See Northern States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Prod., Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201 , (findings of fact must be upheld if reasonably supported by the evidence).
In Re the Custody of S.E.G. 507 N.W.2d 872 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
In Re the Custody of S.E.G. 507 N.W.2d 872 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
“Clearly erroneous” has been defined as “manifestly contrary to the weight of the evidence or not reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” Northern States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Prods., Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201
Hopp v. Grist Mill 499 N.W.2d 812 Minn. 1993
Hopp v. Grist Mill 499 N.W.2d 812 Minn. 1993
1 (1992); see also Northern States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Products, Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by