Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell, 230 N.W.2d 588.

98 citing documents.

Rum River Timber Harvesting, Inc. v. Greg Jeddeloh Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Rum River Timber Harvesting, Inc. v. Greg Jeddeloh Minn. Ct. App. 2025
See Del Hayes & Sons, (concluding that broadly allowing promissory-estoppel claims to override the statute of frauds “would 12 In addition to the subscription-requirement, to satisfy the statute of frauds there must be a writing containing a statement of the consideration, an adequate description of the parties, an
Kelly Bell, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
See Septran, d at 920 (“A district court may, sua sponte, grant summary judgment if, under the same circumstances, it would grant summary judgment on motion of a party.” (quotation omitted)); Del Hayes & Sons, -92 (Minn. 1975) (stating that although no “procedural rule gives the trial court express authority to enter a summary judgment on its own motion,” the trial court has “the inherent power .
James R. Pavelka, Jr., Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“The effect of promisso ry estoppel is to imply a contract from a unilateral or otherwise unenforceable promise coupled by detrimental reliance on the part of the promisee.” Del Hayes & Sons
S. M. Hentges & Sons, Inc., Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
In Del Hayes & Sons, the supreme court considered whether the plaintiff was estopped from asserting the statute of frauds as 25 a defense to a claim of breach of an oral contract.
1648 Properties, LLC, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Paul , d at 255-56 (concluding sua sponte grant of summary judgment was proper where notice rules were not strictly followed but both sides presented affidavits and argument s regarding summary judgment); see also Del Hays & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell , 592 (Minn. 1975) (upholding sua sponte grant of summary judgment where the distri ct court notified the parties of a possible dispositive defense and offered an opportunity to present evidence to counter the defense).
Odyssey Medica_l Technologies, LLC, Appellant, vs. Medtronic, Inc., Respondent. Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Minn. 2021
For example, promissory estoppel implies “a contract from a unilateral or otherwise unenforceable promise coupled by detrimental reliance on the part of the promisee.” Del Hayes & Sons
American Family Insurance, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Del Hayes & Sons, -92 (Minn. 1975).
Mark R. Krampf, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
See Del Hayes & Sons, -92 (Minn. 1975) (explaining that the district court is not expressly authorized to ente r summary judgment sua sponte, but that its inherent power allows it to do so in certain cases).
In Re: The Matter of the Petition for Project No. 77, Clay County Ditch No. 51-Lateral No. 3, … Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell , -92 (Minn. 1975).
Vill. Lofts At St. Anthony Falls Ass'n v. Hous. Partners Iii-Lofts LLC 924 N.W.2d 619 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Vill. Lofts At St. Anthony Falls Ass'n v. Hous. Partners Iii-Lofts LLC 924 N.W.2d 619 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell , 304 Minn. 275 , , 591-92 (1975) ; Federal Land Bank v. Obermoller , , 255 (Minn. App. 1988), review denied (Minn. Oct.
Doran Development, LLC, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
See Del Hayes & Sons, (“A mere refusal to perform an oral agreement, unaccompanied by unconscionable conduct .
Hammes West, LLC v. Dorothy Lyons Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Hammes West, LLC v. Dorothy Lyons Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 280, –92 (1975); (“A district court’s authority to order summary judgment on its own motion stems from its inherent power to dispose summarily of litigation when there remains no genuine issue as to any material fact and judgment s
Cityscapes Development, LLC v. Larry Scheffler 866 N.W.2d 66 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Cityscapes Development, LLC v. Larry Scheffler 866 N.W.2d 66 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 284-86, -95 (1975).
The Bank of New York Mellon, for the certificateholders of CWALT, Inc. Alternative Loan Trust 2005-6CB, Mortgage Pass-through … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
The Bank of New York Mellon, for the certificateholders of CWALT, Inc. Alternative Loan Trust 2005-6CB, Mortgage Pass-through … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
6 We also note that district courts retain the “inherent power” to “dispose summarily of litigation when there remains no genuine issue as to any material fact and judgment must be ordered for one of the parties as a matter of law.” Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 280, –92 (1975).
Gary A. Meiners v. Kruckow Companies, LLC, and third party v. Anthony R. Hammell, third party Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Gary A. Meiners v. Kruckow Companies, LLC, and third party v. Anthony R. Hammell, third party Minn. Ct. App. 2015
See Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 280-81, -92 (1975).
Fieseler Masonry, Inc. v. City of Mabel, Exact Construction Company, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Fieseler Masonry, Inc. v. City of Mabel, Exact Construction Company, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Co., see Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 281, (affirming a district court’s grant of summary judgment sua sponte).
Phelps v. State 823 N.W.2d 891 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Phelps v. State 823 N.W.2d 891 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 280 , -92 (1975).
Double AA Builders, Ltd. v. Grand State Construction L.L.C. 114 P.3d 835 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 2005
Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Chisholm v. Norman 696 N.W.2d 329 Minn. 2005
Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Chisholm v. Norman 696 N.W.2d 329 Minn. 2005
We recognized in Christensen that promissory estoppel applies only to agreements “implied in law where no contract exists in fact.” Christensen, d at 748 (quoting from Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 283 , ).
Greuling v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. 690 N.W.2d 757 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Greuling v. Wells Fargo Home Mortgage, Inc. 690 N.W.2d 757 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 283
Claussen v. City of Lauderdale 681 N.W.2d 722 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Claussen v. City of Lauderdale 681 N.W.2d 722 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 280 , (stating court has inherent power to sua sponte summarily dispose of case in which no genuine issue of material fact exists).
Hebrink v. Farm Bureau Life Insurance Co. 664 N.W.2d 414 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Hebrink v. Farm Bureau Life Insurance Co. 664 N.W.2d 414 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 278-79
AMRESCO Residential Mortgage Corp. v. Stange 631 N.W.2d 444 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
AMRESCO Residential Mortgage Corp. v. Stange 631 N.W.2d 444 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 280 , -92 (1975).
Olson v. Synergistic Technologies Business Systems, Inc. 628 N.W.2d 142 Minn. 2001
Schumacher v. Schumacher 627 N.W.2d 725 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Schumacher v. Schumacher 627 N.W.2d 725 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Thus, in Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 285 , the court held that promissory estoppel was not available because an actual contract was shown, but was unenforceable under the statute of frauds.
Smith v. American States Insurance Co. 586 N.W.2d 784 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Smith v. American States Insurance Co. 586 N.W.2d 784 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
See Del *786 Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 280 , -92 (1975).
Deli v. University of Minnesota 578 N.W.2d 779 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Deli v. University of Minnesota 578 N.W.2d 779 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 283
Kellar v. VonHoltum 568 N.W.2d 186 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Kellar v. VonHoltum 568 N.W.2d 186 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
rt has the inherent authority * * * to grant summary judgment sua sponte without notice to either party where there remains no genuine issue of material fact, one of the parties deserves judgment as a matter of law, and the absence of a formal motion Modern Heating and Air Conditioning, (citing Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 280-81 , -92 (1975)).
Pine Valley Meats, Inc. v. Canal Capital Corp. 566 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Pine Valley Meats, Inc. v. Canal Capital Corp. 566 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
“Promissory estop-pel is the name applied to a contract implied in law where no contract exists in fact.” Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 283 , (footnote omitted).
Septran, Inc. v. Independent School District No. 271, Bloomington, Minnesota 555 N.W.2d 915 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Septran, Inc. v. Independent School District No. 271, Bloomington, Minnesota 555 N.W.2d 915 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
“A district court may, sua sponte, grant summary judgment if, under the same circumstances, it would grant summary judgment on motion of a party.” Estate of Riedel v. Life Care Retirement Communities, Inc., (citing Del Hayes & Sons v. Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 280 , -92 (1975)).

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by