Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Kern v. Janson, 800 N.W.2d 126.

23 citing documents.

Kevin Christensen, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
The supreme court has “emphasized that relief is available under Rule 60.02(f) only in exceptional circumstances.” (quotation omitted).
The Bank of New York Mellon fka The Bank of New York, as Trustee for the certificate holders … Minn. Ct. App. 2026
The Bank of New York Mellon fka The Bank of New York, as Trustee for the certificate holders … Minn. Ct. App. 2026
d 126, 133 (Minn. 2011).
Raymond Semler, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“A district court abuses its discretion if its findings are unsupported by the evidence or its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law.”
Pharaoh El-Forever Left-i Amen El, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Rule 60.02(f) allows for relief in “exceptional circumstances.” (quotation omitted).
Ann M. Firkus, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“A district court abuses its discretion if its findings are unsupported by the evidence or its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law.”
Buck Blacktop, Inc. v. Gary Contracting and Trucking Company, LLC 929 N.W.2d 12 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Buck Blacktop, Inc. v. Gary Contracting and Trucking Company, LLC 929 N.W.2d 12 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Kern v. Janson , , 133 (Minn. 2011).
650 North Main Association, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
See generally Kern v. Janson , d 48 (Minn. 1984).
Unifund CCR, LLC, as assignee of Pilot Receivables Management, LLC v. Jeffrey A. Carney Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Unifund CCR, LLC, as assignee of Pilot Receivables Management, LLC v. Jeffrey A. Carney Minn. Ct. App. 2016
But, “[a] district court abuses its discretion if its findings are unsupported by the evidence or its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law.”
Alan B. Fish, P. A. v. Scott Janson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re Kathryn M. Truscott f/k/a Kathryn M. Ranheim, Stacey A. McNeely v. Kathryn M. Truscott f/k/a Kathryn … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re Kathryn M. Truscott f/k/a Kathryn M. Ranheim, Stacey A. McNeely v. Kathryn M. Truscott f/k/a Kathryn … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
d 126, 132-33 n.3 (Minn. 2011).
Alan B. Fish, P. A. v. Scott Janson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
3 But “[a] district court abuses its discretion if its findings are unsupported by the evidence or its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law.”
Joseph Molesky v. John L. Trebesch, Sheila P. Sabas Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Joseph Molesky v. John L. Trebesch, Sheila P. Sabas Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“A district court abuses its discretion if its findings are unsupported by the evidence or its 4 decision is based on an erroneous view of the law.”
Laxman S. Sundae v. Jacob Salhus, Stacey Smith, Ryan Naddy Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Laxman S. Sundae v. Jacob Salhus, Stacey Smith, Ryan Naddy Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“A district court abuses its discretion if its findings are unsupported by the evidence or its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law.”
James Klapmeier v. Joseph Michael Ebel Minn. Ct. App. 2014
James Klapmeier v. Joseph Michael Ebel Minn. Ct. App. 2014
n.1 (Minn. 2011) (noting that “a final judgment on the merits in one action bars further relief on a later claim if” the other three requirements of res judicata are satisfied (emphasis added)); Rucker, d at 122 (Dietzen, J., concurring) (stating that the third requirement examines “whether there was
In re the Civil Commitment of Moen 837 N.W.2d 40 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
In re the Civil Commitment of Moen 837 N.W.2d 40 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
A motion brought pursuant to rule 60.02 commonly is referred to as a "motion to vacate.” See, 133 (Minn.2011); -32 (Minn.2004); Madson v. Minnesota Mining & Mfg.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by