DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Stringer v. Minnesota Vikings Football Club, LLC, 705 N.W.2d 746.

63 citing documents.

  • Brett Cournoyer, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
    In response, “[t]he nonmoving party must do more than rest on averments or denials of the adverse party ’s pleading.” Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC
  • Rebecca A. Niebuhr v. Jacob Sieberg, Timothy Sieberg Minn. 2026
    Stringer v. Minnesota Vikings Football Club, LLC
  • Magnifi Financial Credit Union, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
    See Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, (“The nonmoving party must do more than rest on averments or denials of the adverse party’s pleading.”).
  • Benchmark Investments, LLC, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
    In response, the nonmoving party “must do more than rest on averments or denials of the adverse party’s pleading.” Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC
  • Mark Weber, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
    DECISION “We review the grant of summary judgment de novo to determine ‘whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.’” Montemayor v. Sebright Prods., Inc., (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, ).
  • Petition of Minnesota Housing Finance Agency for an Order Directing Entry of New Certificate of Title After Mortgage … Minn. Ct. App. 2025
    DECISION Appellate courts review the grant of summary judgment de novo to determine “whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.” Montemayor v. Sebright Prods., Inc., (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, ).
  • Rebecca A. Niebuhr, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
    See Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, 759-60 (Minn. 2005).
  • Zoila Salguero, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
    Minnesota’s workers’ compensation system is “based on a compromise between employees and employers and involves ‘a mutual renunciation of common law rights and defenses by employers and employees alike.’ ” Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, (quoting Minn. Stat. § 176.001).
  • Chad Loran Siegel, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
    “We review the grant of summary judgment de novo to determine ‘whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.’” Montemayor v. Sebright Pro ds., Inc., (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, ).
  • Charlie Thoemke, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
    The purpose of the coemployee exception is “to allow only a narrow window for coemployee liability” because allowing claims against coemployees for simple 6 negligence “tends to shift tort liability from employer to fellow employee in a manner never intended by the workers’ compensation system.” Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, (quotation omitted).
  • Ryan Alvar, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
    Vikings Football Club, LLC
  • Chase Rovere v. Clifford Ling Minn. Ct. App. 2024
  • Chase Rovere v. Clifford Ling Minn. Ct. App. 2024
    “We review the grant of summary judgment de novo to determine ‘whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.’” Montemayor v. Sebright Products, Inc., (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, ).
  • Robert R. Schroeder Construction, Inc. v. Minnesota Department of Transportation v. W. ... Minn. Ct. App. 2023
  • Robert R. Schroeder Construction, Inc. v. Minnesota Department of Transportation v. W. ... Minn. Ct. App. 2023
    But the nonmoving party “must do more than rest on averments or denials of the adverse party’s pleading.” Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC
  • Joyce Walsh, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
    An appellate court “review[s] the grant of summary judgment de novo to determine ‘whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.’” Montemayor v. Sebright Prods., Inc., (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, ); see also Minn. R. Civ.
  • A22-0724 Minn. Ct. App. 2023
    “We review the grant of summary judgment de novo to determine ‘whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.’” Montemayor v. Sebright Prods., Inc., (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, ).
  • Jane Doe, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
    In doing so, we must not “weigh 7 facts or determine the credibility of affidavits and other evidence.” Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC
  • Janet C. Dreyer, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
    “We review the grant of summary judgment de novo to determine ‘whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.’” Montemayor v. Sebright Prods., Inc., (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, ).
  • Carl Green, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
    3 (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, ).
  • In Re: Henry Hickman, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
    “Summary judgment is appropriate when the evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, shows that there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, accord Minn. R. Civ.
  • Ronald G. Davis, Personal Representative of the Estate of Roger F. Davis and Trustee of the Toivo W. … Minn. Ct. App. 2023
    Appellate courts “review the grant of summary judgment de novo to determine ‘whether there are [any] genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.’” Montemayor v. Sebright Prods., Inc., (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, ).
  • Eric Aaron, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
    A party opposing summary judgment “must do more than rest on averments or denials of the adverse party’s pleading.” Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC
  • Minn. 2022
    In doing so, we do not “weigh facts or determine the credibility of affidavits and other evidence.” Montemayor v. Sebright Prod., Inc., (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, ).
  • Arch Insurance Company, as subrogee of Centre Rental, Inc., Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
    DECISION We review a district court’s decision to grant summary judgment de novo to determine “whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its a pplication of the law.” Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC
  • Robert Sharot, individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
    DECISION We review a grant of summary judgment de novo to determine “whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.” Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC
  • Damon Doss, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
    A party is entitled to summary judgment when “there is no genuine issue of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.” Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, see also Minn. R. Civ.
  • Jenny Pachicano, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
    “We do not weigh facts.” Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC
  • Debra Lynn Johnson, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
    Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, -54 (M inn.
  • Docks of White Bear Lake, LLC, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
    “We review the grant of su mmary judgment de novo to determine ‘whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.’” Montemayor v. Sebright Prods., Inc. , (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC , ).
  • Paul Boyum, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
    On appeal from a grant of summary judgment, w e apply a de novo standard of review “to determine ‘whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whethe r the district court erred in its application of the law.’” Montemayor v. Sebright Prods., Inc. , (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, ) .
  • Charles Richard Stone, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
    Appellate courts “review the grant of summary judgment de novo to determine ‘whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.’” Montemayor v. Sebright Prods., Inc., (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, ).
  • Phillip Musselman, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
    D E C I S I O N Minnesota appellate courts “ review the grant of summary judgment de novo to determine ‘whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.’” Montemayor v. Sebright Prods., Inc., (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, ); see Minn. R. Civ.
  • Samson Longtin, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
    “We review the grant of summary judgment de novo to determine ‘whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.’” Montemayor v. Sebright Prods., Inc ., (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC , ).
  • Carnea Roberson, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
    “We review the grant of summary judgment de novo to determine ‘whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.’” Montemayor v. Sebright Prods., Inc. , (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC , ).
  • Mark R. Krampf, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
    cannot recover damages and there is no issue of fact left to be decided.” 17 “We review the grant of su mmary judgment de novo to determine ‘whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.’” Montemayor v. Sebright Prods., Inc. , (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC , ).
  • Assata Kenneh, Minn. 2020
    Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC , d 746, 75 3–54 ( Minn. 2005).
  • Minn. 2020
    See Senogles v. Carlson , (citing Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC , ).
  • Michelle L. MacDonald, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
    See Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC
  • Keith B. Hagen, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
    “We review the grant of summary judgment de novo to determine ‘whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.’” Montemayor v. Sebright Prods., Inc. , (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC , ).
  • Oluf Johnson, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
    ’” Montemayor v. Sebright Prods., Inc. , (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC , ).
  • Ellis Olkon, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
    “We review the grant of summary judgment de novo to determine ‘ whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.’” Montemayor v. Sebright Prods., Inc., (quoting Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, ).
  • Ahmed Said, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
    Appellate courts “do not weigh facts or determine the credibility of affidavits and other evidence.” Stringer v. Minnesota Vikings Football Club, LLC
  • Senogles v. Carlson 902 N.W.2d 38 Minn. 2017
  • Senogles v. Carlson 902 N.W.2d 38 Minn. 2017
    We must not “weigh facts.” Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC
  • Montemayor v. Sebright Products, Inc. 898 N.W.2d 623 Minn. 2017
  • Montemayor v. Sebright Products, Inc. 898 N.W.2d 623 Minn. 2017
    2 ANALYSIS We review the grant of summary judgment de novo to determine “whether there are genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law.” Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC, see also Minn. R. Civ.
  • Sanchez v. Dahlke Trailer Sales, Inc. 897 N.W.2d 267 Minn. 2017
  • Sanchez v. Dahlke Trailer Sales, Inc. 897 N.W.2d 267 Minn. 2017
    Stringer v. Minn. Vikings Football Club, LLC
  • Kelly ex rel. Washburn v. Kraemer Construction, Inc. 896 N.W.2d 504 Minn. 2017