Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord's, Inc., 764 N.W.2d 359.

205 citing documents.

Storms, Inc. v. Mathy Construction Co. 883 N.W.2d 772 Minn. 2016
When a contractual provision is unambiguous, we do not “rewrite, modify, or limit its effect by a strained construction.” Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc., -65 (Minn. 2009).
Michael Harlow v. State of Minnesota Department of Human Services 883 N.W.2d 561 Minn. 2016
Michael Harlow v. State of Minnesota Department of Human Services 883 N.W.2d 561 Minn. 2016
Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc.
Steven T. Meister, M. D., John Does v. Avera Marshall d/b/a Avera Marshall Regional Medical Center, John Roes Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Steven T. Meister, M. D., John Does v. Avera Marshall d/b/a Avera Marshall Regional Medical Center, John Roes Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“Contract interpretation is a question of law that we review de novo.” Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc., (quotation omitted).
Waseca County v. Minnesota Department of Transportation Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Scott B. Lindholm v. Carleton College, and third party v. Metropolitan Mechanical Contractors, third-party Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Waseca County v. Minnesota Department of Transportation Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[The supreme court] ha[s] consistently stated that when a contractual provision is clear and unambiguous, courts should not rewrite, modify, or limit its effect by a strained construction.” Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc., –65 (Minn. 2009).
Scott B. Lindholm v. Carleton College, and third party v. Metropolitan Mechanical Contractors, third-party Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc.
David Waterworth v. Elaine Ekman Minn. Ct. App. 2016
David Waterworth v. Elaine Ekman Minn. Ct. App. 2016
A. “The primary goal of contract interpretation is to ascertain and enforce the intent of the parties.” Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc.
CSM Equities, LLC v. Woodland Village Investments Limited Partnership Minn. Ct. App. 2016
CSM Equities, LLC v. Woodland Village Investments Limited Partnership Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc.
Dirk Fisher v. State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Dirk Fisher v. State of Minnesota, Department of Transportation Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“[T]o raise a genuine issue of material fact the nonmoving party must present more than evidence which merely creates a metaphysical doubt as to a factual issue and which is not sufficiently probative with respect to an essential element of the nonmoving party’s case to permit reasonable persons to draw different conclusions.” Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc., see also N. States Power Co. v. Minn. Metro.
Karla Kay Edenloff v. Maxistorage, LLC, a/k/a Maxistorage 1801, LLC, Maxistorage 1807, LLC and Maxistorage 1711, LLC d/b/a … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Karla Kay Edenloff v. Maxistorage, LLC, a/k/a Maxistorage 1801, LLC, Maxistorage 1807, LLC and Maxistorage 1711, LLC d/b/a … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc.
In re the Estate of: Michael Peter Hanowski Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Estate of: Michael Peter Hanowski Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“[W]aiver is the intentional relinquishment of a known right.” Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc., (quotations omitted).
Julie Strelow v. Winona Steamboat Days Festival Association Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Julie Strelow v. Winona Steamboat Days Festival Association Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc., d 359, 364 (Minn. 2009).
Mike Malone v. Frances S. Bland, John Doe Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Mike Malone v. Frances S. Bland, John Doe Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc.
Mohrman & Kaardal, P.A. v. Gene Rechtzigel Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Mohrman & Kaardal, P.A. v. Gene Rechtzigel Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s Inc.
Fred Newell v. Timothy Eide, and third party v. Norcostco, Inc., Third Party Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Fred Newell v. Timothy Eide, and third party v. Norcostco, Inc., Third Party Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc.
Lisa Miller v. Dan Marosok, Forest Lake Area High School d/b/a Independent School District 831 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Lisa Miller v. Dan Marosok, Forest Lake Area High School d/b/a Independent School District 831 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc.
Richard Eugene Heggemeyer v. Town Board of Supervisors, Spalding Township, Aitkin County, MN Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Richard Eugene Heggemeyer v. Town Board of Supervisors, Spalding Township, Aitkin County, MN Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc.
LHB Properties, LLC v. E. Y. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
LHB Properties, LLC v. E. Y. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“Contract interpretation is a question of law that we review de novo.” Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc., (quotation omitted).
Construction Services, Inc. of Duluth v. Town of Alborn Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Construction Services, Inc. of Duluth v. Town of Alborn Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“[T]he nonmoving party must present more than evidence which merely creates a metaphysical doubt as to a factual issue and which is not sufficiently 7 probative with respect to an essential element of the nonmoving party’s case to permit reasonable persons to draw different conclusions.” Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc., (quotation omitted).
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation v. Paul v. Pope, Gretchen A. Pope Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation v. Paul v. Pope, Gretchen A. Pope Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc.
Tracey Weathers v. HSBC Bank USA, NA, as Trustee for GSAA Home Equity Trust 2005-6 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Tracey Weathers v. HSBC Bank USA, NA, as Trustee for GSAA Home Equity Trust 2005-6 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s Inc.
Farmers Insurance Exchange v. Erik Hjelle, The Insurance Shop Services, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Farmers Insurance Exchange v. Erik Hjelle, The Insurance Shop Services, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“[T]he nonmoving party must present more than evidence which merely creates a metaphysical doubt as to a factual issue and which is not sufficiently probative with respect to an essential element of the nonmoving party’s case to permit reasonable persons to draw different conclusions.” Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc., (quotation omitted).
David Herzog v. Cottingham & Butler Insurance Services, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
David Herzog v. Cottingham & Butler Insurance Services, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc.
Robert Berg a/k/a Rob Berg v. Keith Waters & Associates, Inc., Portico Green, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Robert Berg a/k/a Rob Berg v. Keith Waters & Associates, Inc., Portico Green, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc., 4 (Minn. 2009).
Gurvin Femrite v. City of Lowry Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Gurvin Femrite v. City of Lowry Minn. Ct. App. 2014
ade with knowledge of the falsity of the representation or made without knowing whether it was true or false”; (3) the representation was made with the intention to induce the Femrites to rely on it; (4) the representation caused the Femrites to act in reliance on it; and (5) the Femrites “suffered pecuniary damages as a result of the reliance.” See Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc.
Nicole M. Spargur v. Freeborn County Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Nicole M. Spargur v. Freeborn County Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Valspar Refinish, Inc. v. Gaylord’s, Inc.
The Bank of New York Mellon formerly known as the Bank of New York, as Trustee v. Anthony … Minn. Ct. App. 2014