Cited by

relations’ through the issuance of a declaratory judgment.” Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Investments , LLC, d 576, 579 (Minn. 2012) (quoting Minn. Stat. § 555.01 (2010)).

“[A] complaint requesting declaratory relief must present a substantive cause of action that would be cognizable in a nondeclaratory suit.” Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Inv., LLC

“Statutes of limitations apply to a declaratory judgment action to the same extent as a nondeclaratory proceeding based on the same cause of action.” Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Invs., LLC, d 576, 577 (Minn. 2012).

Statutes of limitations also serve “to spare the courts from litigation of stale claims” and to protect defendants from having to defend themselves “after memories have faded, witnesses have died or disappeared, and evidence has been lost.” Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Inv., LLC, (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).

Statutes of limitations “spare the courts from litigation of stale claims,” and parties from defending their case “after memories have faded, witnesses have died or disappeared, and evidence has been lost.” Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Inv., LLC, (quoting Chase Sec.

Respondents’ argument for application of one of these statutes of limitations relies on the Minnesota Supreme Court’s decision in Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Investments, LLC

“A party seeking a declaratory judgment must have an independent, underlying cause of action based on a common-law or statutory right.” Id.; (“Some recovery theory must underlie a declaratory judgment demand.” (quotation omitted)); Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Invs., LLC, d 576, 579 (Minn. 2012) (reasoning that “a complaint requesting declaratory relief must present a substantive cause of action that would be cognizable in a nondeclaratory suit.

1(1) (2022); Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Invs., LLC, d 576, 581 (Minn. 2012).

§ 1983 “ ‘are best characterized as personal injury actions,’ ” so “a State’s personal injury statute of limitations should be applied to all § 1983 claims” (quoting Wilson v. Garcia, 471 U.S. 261, 280 (1985)); see also Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Inv s., LLC, (“[S]tatutes of limitations apply to a declaratory judgment action to the same extent as a nondeclaratory proceeding based on the same cause of action.”).

v. S&P Home Inv., LLC, (quoting Chase Sec.

“Minnesota’s Uniform Declaratory Judgments Act grants cour ts the power to declare a party’ s legal rights, status, and relations through the issuance of a declaratory judgment.” Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Inv., LLC, (quotation and alteration omitted).

A. Statute of limitations PolyMet’s argument for application of a statute of limitations relies on the supreme court’s decision in Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Inv., LLC

See Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Invs., LLC , , 578-79 n.1 (Minn. 2012) (assuming without deciding the sufficiency of a complaint).

Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Invs., LLC , , 579 (Minn. 2012) ; see Minn. Stat. § 555.01 (stating that courts have the "power to declare rights, status, and other legal relations" through the issuance of a declaratory judgment).

Likewise, in Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Investments, LLC, a case in which the plaintiff sought a declaratory judgment, the supreme court stated that “we cannot allow plaintiffs to make a mockery of statutes of 14 limitations by the simple expedient of creative labeling.” Id.

When determining which statute of limitations applies to a cau se of action, “we examine the essence or gravamen of the action.” Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Inv., LLC , (quotation omitted).

See 9 Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Inv., LLC, (statin g that fact that party requests declaratory relief does not change nature of lawsuit and “a complaint requesting declaratory relief must present a substantive cause of action that would be cognizable in a nondeclaratory suit” (quotation omitted)); Ryan v. Hennepin Cty., 224 Minn. 444, 448

“[W]e examine the essence or ‘gravamen of the action’ to determine which, if any, statutes of limitation apply.” Weavewood, Inc. v. S&P Home Invs., LLC, ().

The district court concluded that the statute of limitations did not bar Robert Hall from bringing his claims for declaratory relief, but held that a six-year period of limitations applied to his claims for money damages pursuant to Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Invs., LLC, d 576, 579-80 (Minn. 2012).