Cited by

v. Anda, see also Hunter v. Anchor Bank, N.A., (“[A]n argument for reversal that is not raised in an appellant’s principal brief is forfeited.”), rev. denied (Minn. Mar.

v. Anda, (noting that issues not raised in an appellant’s brief are generally forfeited).

v. Anda, (quotation omitted).

v. Anda, (explaining that raising issues for appeal in a reply brief is not proper practice), they are unavailing.

v. Anda, (“[R]aising issues for appeal in one’s reply brief is not proper practice and is not to be permitted.” (quotation omitted) ); - 20 (Minn. 2002) (noting that a pro se litigant forfeits any claims made if the litigant fails to provide legal arguments or citation t

v. Anda, (quotation omitted).

v. Anda, n.21 (Minn. 2010) (stating that a party who has “suffered damage as a result of the negligent actions of another [has a duty] to avoid injury and to mitigate damages”); Deutz-Allis Credit Corp. v. Jensen , (stating that the nonbreaching party to a contract must use “reaso

v. Anda, d 860, 876 (Minn. 2010).

v. Anda, (quotation omitted).

v. Anda, d 860, 887 (Minn. 2010) (noting that issues not raised or argued in appellant’s principal brief 8 cannot be raised in a reply brief).

v. Anda, n.2 (Minn. App. 1990), rev. denied (Minn. Sept.

v. Anda, (recognizing that raising issues for the first time in a reply brief is “not proper practice and is not to be permitted”).

v. Anda, (recognizing that raising issues for the first time in a reply brief is “not proper practice and is not to be permitted ,” though an appellate court may decide to consider the issues, especially if they were raised to district court (quotation omitted) ).

v. Anda, (stating that, generally, issues not raised or argued in an appellant’s principal brief cannot be raised in a reply brief).

v. Anda, (applying Hannuksela in a civil case).