Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite First National Bank of St. Paul v. Ramier, 311 N.W.2d 502.

89 citing documents.

Moline Machinery, LLC, et al., Appellants, vs. City of Duluth, Respondent Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Moline Machinery, LLC, et al., Appellants, vs. City of Duluth, Respondent Minn. Ct. App. 2025
)); Brand & Co. v. Williams, 13 N.W.
Great North Capital Consultants, Inc., Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
David Carl Hepfl v. Jodine Patrice Meadowcroft 9 N.W.3d 567 Minn. 2024
David Carl Hepfl v. Jodine Patrice Meadowcroft 9 N.W.3d 567 Minn. 2024
(unjust enrichment claims “do not lie simply because one party benefits from the efforts or obligations of others”).
Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, Inc. v. Joint Revocable Trust Agreement of John N. Charais and ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, Inc. v. Joint Revocable Trust Agreement of John N. Charais and ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In the Matter of the Leonard E. Erlandson and Marion L. Erlandson Irrevocable Trust Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In the Matter of the Leonard E. Erlandson and Marion L. Erlandson Irrevocable Trust Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Paul Herlache, Minn. 2023
Eric Aaron, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Paul Herlache, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
d 502, 504 (Minn. 1981).
Pohocogo, LLC, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(quotation omitted); -62 (Minn. 1969) (“The theory of unjust enrichment .
Jill Hansen, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Servs., Inc., d 302, 306 (Minn. 1996) (quoting First Nat’l ).
Ann Marie Hall, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
KLC Financial, Inc., Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
See, e.g., First Nat’l Bank v. Ramier , -04 (Minn. 1981) (declining to create a constructive trust in real property in favor of a bank lender under an unjust -enrichment theory when bank gave an unsecured loan to an individual borrower who died while jointly owning the subject property with a spouse).
John Moore, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Allen Battle v. Auto Sales 1, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Allen Battle v. Auto Sales 1, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(quotation omitted); see Park-Lake Car Wash, (stating that “unjust” can also mean “unconscionable by reason of a bad motive” (quotation omitted)).
Reichel Investments, L.P. v. Craig A. Reichel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Reichel Investments, L.P. v. Craig A. Reichel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Robert Martin v. A�BULAE, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Starry Electric, Inc. v. Gilman Cooperative Creamery Association Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Robert Martin v. A�BULAE, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Starry Electric, Inc. v. Gilman Cooperative Creamery Association Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(quotation omitted); see Park-Lake Car Wash, (stating that “unjust” can also mean “unconscionable by reason of a bad motive” (quotation omitted)).
Terry L. Gates v. Michael L. Macken Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Terry L. Gates v. Michael L. Macken Minn. Ct. App. 2016
or that it would be “morally wrong” for the party to retain the benefit.
Diversified Water Diversion, Inc. v. Hogenson Properties, Ltd. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Diversified Water Diversion, Inc. v. Hogenson Properties, Ltd. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Mavco, Inc. d/b/a Maverick Construction Company v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Mavco, Inc. d/b/a Maverick Construction Company v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Langford Tool & Drill Co. v. The 401 Group, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Langford Tool & Drill Co. v. The 401 Group, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Elfi E. Janssen v. Lommen, Abdo, Cole, King & Stageberg, P. A., Sibley Holdings, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Elfi E. Janssen v. Lommen, Abdo, Cole, King & Stageberg, P. A., Sibley Holdings, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
), review denied (Minn. Jan 20, 2009).
Anita W. Sluck v. Terence E. Rapacz Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Anita W. Sluck v. Terence E. Rapacz Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc. 820 N.W.2d 826 Minn. 2012
Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc. 820 N.W.2d 826 Minn. 2012
(concluding that constructive trust was inappropriate when a bank did not require security for a loan or obtain a potential joint tenant’s signature on the promissory note); Klass v. Twin City Fed.
In re the Estate of Neuman 819 N.W.2d 211 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
In re the Estate of Neuman 819 N.W.2d 211 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
First Nat’l Southtown Plumbing, *217 140 (Minn.App.1992).
Dahl v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. 742 N.W.2d 186 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Dahl v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. 742 N.W.2d 186 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Fraser v. Fraser 702 N.W.2d 283 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Fraser v. Fraser 702 N.W.2d 283 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Mon-Ray, Inc. v. Granite Re, Inc. 677 N.W.2d 434 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Mon-Ray, Inc. v. Granite Re, Inc. 677 N.W.2d 434 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
First Construction Credit, Inc. v. Simonson Lumber of Waite Park, Inc. 663 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
First Construction Credit, Inc. v. Simonson Lumber of Waite Park, Inc. 663 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
An equitable mortgage can be implied when parties to a loan transaction intend that there be security for the loan: “An equitable mortgage is created when the parties to the transaction intended it to be essentially a security transaction.” First Nat’l
Schumacher v. Schumacher 627 N.W.2d 725 Minn. Ct. App. 2001