Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Miller v. Lankow, 801 N.W.2d 120.

29 citing documents.

Snowman Construction, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
d 120, 128 (Minn. 2011).
State of Minnesota Office of the Attorney General v. Madison Equities, Inc. Minn. 2026
State of Minnesota Office of the Attorney General v. Madison Equities, Inc. Minn. 2026
–28 (Minn. 2011) (“The duty to preserve evidence exists not only after the formal commencement of litigation, but whenever a party knows or should know that litigation is reasonably foreseeable.” (footnote omitted)).
Daniel W Crandall, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
As such, the Crandalls did not satisfy the notice requirement in Miller [v. Lankow, ] and have spoliated evidence.
Angeleah Joy Brandt, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“A party challenging the district court’s choice of a sanction has the difficult burden of convincing an appellate court that the district court abused its discretion.” Miller v. Lankow
Star Bank, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“A party challenging the district court’s choice of a sanction has the difficult burden of convincing an appellate court that the district court abused its discretion.”
Craig Stevenson, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Richard Langree, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
In re the Margaret A. Flolid Trust Agreement Dated December 12, 1994. Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Mark D. Island, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Miller v. Lankow , -28 (Minn. 2011).
Gary Gruett, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
In the Matter of: Fatoumata Binta Diallo, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Karen Mattinen, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
See Miller v. Lankow , (explaining that spoliation of evidence is the “failure to preserve property for another’s use as evidence in pending or future litigation” (quotation omitted)).
Thumper Pond Resort, LLC d/b/a Thumper Pond Resort, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Miller v. Lankow , -28 (Minn. 2011).
, A18-1214, A18-1406 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“We review a district court’s decision to impose spoliation sanctions for abuse of discretion.”
Teresa Thompson, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
K&S Heating, Air Conditioning & Plumbing, LLC, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Curtis Trude, (A15-0378), (A15-1863, A15-1864), Glenwood State Bank, counterclaimant, and third party v. Peterson Earth Movers, Inc., Third … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Curtis Trude, (A15-0378), (A15-1863, A15-1864), Glenwood State Bank, counterclaimant, and third party v. Peterson Earth Movers, Inc., Third … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Negassi H. Ghebrehiwet v. Khaled Ghneim Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Negassi H. Ghebrehiwet v. Khaled Ghneim Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“A district court abuses its discretion when it bases its conclusions on an erroneous view of the law.” d 120, 127 (Minn. 2011).
Sandra Williams v. Canterbury Inn Shakopee, LLC, d/b/a Americas Best Value Inn & Suites, d/b/a Arizonas Restaurant & … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Sandra Williams v. Canterbury Inn Shakopee, LLC, d/b/a Americas Best Value Inn & Suites, d/b/a Arizonas Restaurant & … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
R. Wynn Kearney, Jr., M.D. v. The Orthopaedic and Fracture Clinic, P.A. v. Steven B. Curtis, intervening and … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
R. Wynn Kearney, Jr., M.D. v. The Orthopaedic and Fracture Clinic, P.A. v. Steven B. Curtis, intervening and … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“A district court abuses its discretion when it bases its conclusions on an erroneous view of the law.”
State of Minnesota v. Tarah Louise Fichtner 867 N.W.2d 242 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Tarah Louise Fichtner 867 N.W.2d 242 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“A district court abuses its discretion when it bases its conclusions on an erroneous view of the law.”
TC/American Monorail, Inc. v. Custom Conveyor Corp. 840 N.W.2d 414 Minn. 2013
TC/American Monorail, Inc. v. Custom Conveyor Corp. 840 N.W.2d 414 Minn. 2013
v. Minn. Dep't of Human Servs., , 821 n. 3 (Minn.2013)