Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Slindee v. Fritch Investments, LLC, 760 N.W.2d 903.

25 citing documents.

Richard G. Perry, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
-10 (Minn. App. 2009) (quotation omitted).
Todd A. Wiederich, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
To establish a practical boundary by express agreement, a party must first prove there was an “express agreement between the landowners to set an exact, precise line.” Slindee v. Fritch Invs., LLC, (quotations omitted).
Paul A. Kruger, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Slindee v. Fritch Invs., LLC, ( rev. denied (Minn. Jan.
In re the Matter of the Application of Mekonnen Tulu and Tadelech N. Guda to Register the Title … Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Slindee v. Fritch Invs., LLC
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Children of: L. K. and A. S., Parents 9 N.W.3d 174 Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Children of: L. K. and A. S., Parents 9 N.W.3d 174 Minn. Ct. App. 2024
See, rev. denied (Minn. July 17, 2012); Slindee v. Fritch Invs., LLC
In re the Marriage of: Chriss O. Latterell v. Mary Jean Latterell Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In re the Marriage of: Chriss O. Latterell v. Mary Jean Latterell Minn. Ct. App. 2024
30, 2014); Slindee v. Fritch Inv., LLC, (providing that appellate courts “generally do not address issues presented in but not decided by the district court” and remanding to give the district court the opportunity to address an issue in the first instance).
Deborah Jane Clapp v. Rochelle Cox, in her official capacity as Interim Superintendent of Minneapolis ... Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Deborah Jane Clapp v. Rochelle Cox, in her official capacity as Interim Superintendent of Minneapolis ... Minn. Ct. App. 2023
30, 2014); Slindee v. Fritch Invs., LLC, (same).
Ronald A. Hagle, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Slindee v. Fritch Invs., LLC
David R. Towley, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Slindee v. Fritch Investments, LLC
Lyle Batton, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
A boundary by practical location may be established in one of three ways: “(1) by acquiescing in the boundary for a sufficient period of time to bar a right of entry under the statute of limitations; (2) by expressly agreeing with the other party on the boundary and then by acquiescing to that agreement; or (3) by estoppel.” Slindee v. Fritch Investments, LLC
Carol Vanerka Stephens, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
A deed is a written instrument and reformation “generally involves the original parties to an instrument and those in privity with the original parties.” Slindee v. Fritch Invs., LLC, (quotation omitted).
Richard S. Anderson, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Slindee v. Fritch Invs., LLC
James Cortese, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Slindee v. Fritch Invs., LLC
James A. Nilsson, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
See Slindee v. Fritch Inv s., LLC, ( implying that boundary by practical location applies independent of a survey).
In the Matter of the Petition of Wells Fargo Bank, N. A., for an Order Determining the Boundary … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In the Matter of the Petition of Wells Fargo Bank, N. A., for an Order Determining the Boundary … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Slindee v. Fritch Invs., LLC, (–29 (Minn. App. 2008)).
In the Matter of the Petition of Melvin J. Cummins for an Order Determining Boundary Lines. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In the Matter of the Petition of Melvin J. Cummins for an Order Determining Boundary Lines. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Slindee v. Fritch Invs., LLC
Ruikkie v. Nall 798 N.W.2d 806 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Ruikkie v. Nall 798 N.W.2d 806 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Slindee v. Fritch Invs., LLC, (citing Benz v. City of St.
SINGELMAN v. St. Francis Medical Center 777 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
SINGELMAN v. St. Francis Medical Center 777 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
This court “generally [does] not address issues presented in but not decided by the district court.” Slindee v. Fritch Invs., LLC