Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Hauser v. Mealey, 263 N.W.2d 803.

148 citing documents.

Electric Fetus Co. v. City of Duluth 547 N.W.2d 448 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Electric Fetus Co. v. City of Duluth 547 N.W.2d 448 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
In Re the Trusts: Created by Hormel 543 N.W.2d 668 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
In Re the Trusts: Created by Hormel 543 N.W.2d 668 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
McNeill v. Dakota County State Bank 522 N.W.2d 381 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
McNeill v. Dakota County State Bank 522 N.W.2d 381 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
(res judicata); Anderson v. Mikel Drilling Co., 257 Minn. 487, 491 , (collateral estoppel).
Rw v. Tf 510 N.W.2d 231 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Rw v. Tf 510 N.W.2d 231 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
R.W. v. T.F. 510 N.W.2d 231 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
R.W. v. T.F. 510 N.W.2d 231 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Matter of Trusts Created by Hormel 504 N.W.2d 505 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Matter of Trusts Created by Hormel 504 N.W.2d 505 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
-09 (Minn.1978) (where the previous court orders were summary orders unaccompanied by memoranda and the judgment might have been based upon one or more of several grounds but did not expressly rely upon any one of them, none of the possible issues is conclusively established under the doctrine of collateral es-top
Maras v. City of Brainerd 502 N.W.2d 69 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Maras v. City of Brainerd 502 N.W.2d 69 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Matter of Trust Created by Hill 499 N.W.2d 475 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Matter of Trust Created by Hill 499 N.W.2d 475 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
(where a judgment may be based on one or more grounds, but did not expressly rely on any one of them, none of the grounds are conclusively established under the doctrine of collateral estoppel).
Culberson v. Chapman 496 N.W.2d 821 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Culberson v. Chapman 496 N.W.2d 821 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Harford v. University of Minnesota 494 N.W.2d 903 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Harford v. University of Minnesota 494 N.W.2d 903 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
“A judgment on the merits constitutes an absolute bar to a second suit for the same cause of action, and is conclusive between parties and privies, not only as to every matter which was actually litigated, but also as to every matter which might have been litigated therein.” (quoting The Youngstown Mines Corp. v. Prout, 266 Minn. 450, 466 , ) (emphasis added).
Parker v. MVBA Harvestore Systems 491 N.W.2d 904 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Parker v. MVBA Harvestore Systems 491 N.W.2d 904 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Dziubak v. Mott 486 N.W.2d 837 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Dziubak v. Mott 486 N.W.2d 837 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Green v. City of Coon Rapids 485 N.W.2d 712 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Green v. City of Coon Rapids 485 N.W.2d 712 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Arbitration Between Charboneau v. American Family Insurance Co. 481 N.W.2d 19 Minn. 1992
Arbitration Between Charboneau v. American Family Insurance Co. 481 N.W.2d 19 Minn. 1992
In Re the Welfare of M.D.O. 462 N.W.2d 370 Minn. 1990
In Re the Welfare of M.D.O. 462 N.W.2d 370 Minn. 1990
see also Restatement (Second) of Judgments § 27 (1982).
Surf and Sand, Inc. v. Gardebring 457 N.W.2d 782 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Surf and Sand, Inc. v. Gardebring 457 N.W.2d 782 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Similarly, we note that under a mentioned in appellant’s brief, we would conclude that both motions arose out of the same set of facts.
Nitz v. Nitz 456 N.W.2d 450 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Nitz v. Nitz 456 N.W.2d 450 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
(quoting The Youngstown Mines Corp. v. Prout, 266 Minn. 450, 466 , ) (emphasis deleted).
Johnson v. Morris 445 N.W.2d 563 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Johnson v. Morris 445 N.W.2d 563 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Kohler v. Fletcher 442 N.W.2d 169 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Kohler v. Fletcher 442 N.W.2d 169 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
TCF Banking & Savings, F.A. v. Loft Homes, Inc. 439 N.W.2d 735 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
TCF Banking & Savings, F.A. v. Loft Homes, Inc. 439 N.W.2d 735 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Johnson v. Hunter 435 N.W.2d 821 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Johnson v. Hunter 435 N.W.2d 821 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
McBroom v. AlChroma, Inc.
Art Goebel, Inc. v. Array Construction Co. 437 N.W.2d 117 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Housing & Redevelopment Authority v. Alexander 437 N.W.2d 97 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Housing & Redevelopment Authority v. Alexander 437 N.W.2d 97 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Art Goebel, Inc. v. Array Construction Co. 437 N.W.2d 117 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Mattsen, d at 49 (emphasis added) (
Beutz v. A.O. Smith Harvestore Products, Inc. 431 N.W.2d 528 Minn. 1988
Beutz v. A.O. Smith Harvestore Products, Inc. 431 N.W.2d 528 Minn. 1988
Mendota Heights Associates v. Friel 414 N.W.2d 480 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Franklin Auto Body Co. v. Wicker 414 N.W.2d 509 Minn. Ct. App. 1987