Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Posey v. Fossen, 707 N.W.2d 712.

35 citing documents.

Rose Kissner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Oronoco Estates MHC Owner LLC, d/b/a Oakwood Meadows MHC, Appellant (A25-1751), Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Jerome E. Johnson, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Dr. Wayne R. Freese, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
We will reverse the district court’s prevailing- party determination only if the district court “abused its discretion, exercised its discretion in an arbitrary or capricious manner, or based its ruling on an erroneous vi ew of the law.” (quotation omitted).
Olson Property Investments, LLC, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
” Borchert v. Maloney , see also Posey v. Fossen , (noting that where more than one party succeeds in part, determining which party prevailed involves “a careful weighing of the relativ e success of the parties to a lawsuit”) ; Benigni v. C ounty of St.
Dr. Eric Steffen, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
The district court abuses this discretion only if its decision “is against logic and facts on the record.”
Pamela Maslowski, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Kevin S. Carpenter, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
James Robinson, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
This determination is a “pragmatic” one that “depends on a careful weighing of the relative success of the parties to a lawsuit, a process that invests a certain amount of discretion in the district court.” ; O’Brien, d at 902 (the prevailing - party determination “depends on a pragmatic analysis that takes into account [a party ’s] success on the merits and recovery of damages”).
Eric John Blehr, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
A district court abuses its discr etion when its decision is “against logic and facts on the record.”
Gerring Properties Inc., et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
A district court abuses its discretion “when its decision is against logic and facts on the record.” Posey v. Fossen
Big-D Construction Midwest, LLC, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
A district court abuses its discretion when its decision is “against logic and facts on the record.”
John Moore, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Kyle Wendell Else, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
A district cour t abuses its discretion “when its decision is against logic and facts on the record.”
Sokkhan Ka, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
The Weitz Company, LLC, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“[A] district court abuses its discretion when its decision is against logic and facts on the record.”
Lauren Hamilton, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
This court will only reverse the district court’ s prevailing-party determination if the district court “abused its discretion, exercised its discretion in an arbitrary or capricious manner, or based its ruling on an erroneous view of the law.” Posey v. Fossen , (quotation omitted).
John Athanasakoupolous, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
, A17-2080, A17-2081, A18-0015 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Ernster v. Scheele 895 N.W.2d 262 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Ernster v. Scheele 895 N.W.2d 262 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
This court will reverse the district court’s prevailing-party determination if the district court “abused its discretion, exercised its discretion in an arbitrary or capricious maimer, or based its ruling on an erroneous view of the law.” (quotation omitted).
Staffing Specifix, Inc. v. TempWorks Management Services, Inc. 896 N.W.2d 115 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Staffing Specifix, Inc. v. TempWorks Management Services, Inc. 896 N.W.2d 115 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Sevs., “[T]he district court has discretion to determine not only the amount of an award of costs and disbursements, but also who the prevailing party is for purposes of such an award.”
Victoria L. Sloan v. Kelly O�Neil, Regina Sabbia, Kerrie Cathcart, Uptown Realty & Management LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Victoria L. Sloan v. Kelly O�Neil, Regina Sabbia, Kerrie Cathcart, Uptown Realty & Management LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2017
This court will only reverse the district court’s prevailing-party determination if the district court “abused its discretion, exercised its discretion in an arbitrary or capricious manner, or based its ruling on an erroneous view of the law.” (quotation omitted).
Maria F. Olson v. James Scott Kent Peoples National Bank of Mora Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Maria F. Olson v. James Scott Kent Peoples National Bank of Mora Minn. Ct. App. 2016
A court abuses its discretion under rule 60.02 when its decision is “against logic and facts on the record,” is “arbitrary or capricious,” or is based on “an erroneous view of the law.” (quotation omitted).
Glendalough Homeowners' Association v. Jovani Nassar, and third party v. Evermoor Community Association, third party Community Development, Inc., … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Glendalough Homeowners' Association v. Jovani Nassar, and third party v. Evermoor Community Association, third party Community Development, Inc., … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
A district court abuses its discretion if its decision contravenes “logic and facts on the record,” is “arbitrary or capricious,” or is based on “an erroneous view of the law.” d 712, 714 (Minn. App. 2006) (quotation omitted).
Timothy T. Childs v. North River Road Condominium Association Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Timothy T. Childs v. North River Road Condominium Association Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Johnny L. Moore v. Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Johnny L. Moore v. Park Nicollet Methodist Hospital Minn. Ct. App. 2015
A district court abuses its discretion if its decision contravenes “logic and facts on the record,” is “arbitrary or capricious,” or is based on “an erroneous view of the law.” (quotation omitted).
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
-15 (Minn.App.2006) (setting forth a “pragmatic analysis” in identifying the prevailing party).