Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc., 820 N.W.2d 826.

212 citing documents.

Analog Technologies Corp. v. Edward Knutson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“Contract interpretation is a question of law that we review de novo.” Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
Toyota-Lift of Minnesota, Inc. v. American Warehouse Systems, LLC, and third party v. Les Nielsen, third party 868 N.W.2d 689 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Minn. Stat. § 181.14 is part of the Payment of Wages Act, the purpose of which is “to penalize employers that fail to promptly pay their employees’ wages.” Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
In re the Estate of: Barbara Jean LaPoint Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Estate of: Barbara Jean LaPoint Minn. Ct. App. 2015
See Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc., (providing that it is appropriate to recognize a party’s rights as a third-party beneficiary if that party was an intended beneficiary of another’s contract under the duty-owed or intent-to-benefit test).
John S. Drewitz v. Motorwerks, Inc. 867 N.W.2d 197 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
John S. Drewitz v. Motorwerks, Inc. 867 N.W.2d 197 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
But see Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc., (declining to state whether a more deferential standard of review “might” be applicable when district court balances equities but does not award equitable relief).
Jon P. Hanbury, individually and as father and natural guardian of Andrew and Nick Hanbury v. American Family … 865 N.W.2d 83 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Jon P. Hanbury, individually and as father and natural guardian of Andrew and Nick Hanbury v. American Family … 865 N.W.2d 83 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“The goal of all statutory interpretation is to ‘ascertain and effectuate the intention of the legislature.’” Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc., (quoting Minn. Stat. § 645.16 (2010)).
Diversified Water Diversion, Inc. v. Hogenson Properties, Ltd. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Prime Security Bank v. A&G Investments, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Diversified Water Diversion, Inc. v. Hogenson Properties, Ltd. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
9 Minnesota law is clear that in order to prevail on a claim of unjust enrichment, “a claimant must establish an implied-in-law or quasi-contract in which the defendant received a benefit of value that unjustly enriched the defendant in a manner that is illegal or unlawful.” Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc., (citing First Nat’l Bank of St.
Prime Security Bank v. A&G Investments, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
The “goal of all statutory interpretation is to ‘ascertain and effectuate the intention of the legislature.”’ Caldas v. Affordable Granite 9 & Stone, Inc., (quoting Minn. Stat. § 645.16 (2010)).
State of Minnesota v. Carl Lee Nodes 863 N.W.2d 77 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Carl Lee Nodes 863 N.W.2d 77 Minn. 2015
Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
Terminal Transport, Inc. v. Minnesota Insurance Guaranty Association 862 N.W.2d 487 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Terminal Transport, Inc. v. Minnesota Insurance Guaranty Association 862 N.W.2d 487 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
Mavco, Inc. d/b/a Maverick Construction Company v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Mavco, Inc. d/b/a Maverick Construction Company v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
Persigehl v. Ridgebrook Investments Ltd. Partnership 858 N.W.2d 824 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Builders Commonwealth, Inc. v. Jason Morgan Worsfold Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Builders Commonwealth, Inc. v. Jason Morgan Worsfold Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
Persigehl v. Ridgebrook Investments Ltd. Partnership 858 N.W.2d 824 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“The goal of all statutory interpretation is to ‘ascertain and effectuate the intention of the legislature.’ ” Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc., (quoting Minn.Stat.
Jeff Persigehl and Samone Bodley, individually and on behalf of the putative classes, (A14-0027), (A14-0123) v. Ridgebrook Investments … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Jeff Persigehl and Samone Bodley, individually and on behalf of the putative classes, (A14-0027), (A14-0123) v. Ridgebrook Investments … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“The goal of all statutory interpretation is to ‘ascertain and effectuate the intention of the legislature.’” Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc., d 826, 836 (Minn. 2012) (quoting Minn. Stat. § 645.16 (2010)).
Langford Tool & Drill Co. v. The 401 Group, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Langford Tool & Drill Co. v. The 401 Group, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
Robert Berg a/k/a Rob Berg v. Keith Waters & Associates, Inc., Portico Green, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Robert Berg a/k/a Rob Berg v. Keith Waters & Associates, Inc., Portico Green, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“Unjust enrichment is an equitable doctrine that allows a plaintiff to recover a benefit conferred upon a defendant when retention of the benefit is not legally justifiable.” Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
Jeffery R. Schultz v. Scott A. Mende, and third party v. City of Madison Lake, third party Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Jeffery R. Schultz v. Scott A. Mende, and third party v. City of Madison Lake, third party Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
George E. Antrim, III, PLLC v. Samar Sabri a/k/a Samar M. Tomala a/k/a Samar Meri Tomala a/k/a Samar … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
George E. Antrim, III, PLLC v. Samar Sabri a/k/a Samar M. Tomala a/k/a Samar Meri Tomala a/k/a Samar … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
see also Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc., (“Unjust enrichment is an equitable doctrine that allows a plaintiff to recover a benefit conferred upon a defendant when retention of the benefit is not legally justifiable.”).
Robert Davis Construction, Inc. v. Morgan C. Althoen Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Robert Davis Construction, Inc. v. Morgan C. Althoen Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Unjust enrichment is an equitable claim “that allows a plaintiff to recover a benefit conferred upon a defendant when retention of the benefit is not legally justifiable.” Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
Alice Ann Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud 853 N.W.2d 713 Minn. 2014
Alice Ann Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud 853 N.W.2d 713 Minn. 2014
Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
Fieseler Masonry, Inc. v. City of Mabel, Exact Construction Company, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Fieseler Masonry, Inc. v. City of Mabel, Exact Construction Company, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
v. Minn. State Zoological Bd., quoted with approval in Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
Sterling State Bank v. Maas Commercial Properties, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Sterling State Bank v. Maas Commercial Properties, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Duluth v. Brian Lee 852 N.W.2d 683 Minn. 2014
Housing and Redevelopment Authority of Duluth v. Brian Lee 852 N.W.2d 683 Minn. 2014
Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
County of Hennepin v. 1010 Metrodome Square, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
County of Hennepin v. 1010 Metrodome Square, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc., (quotation omitted).
David P. Cook v. Wendi C. Wicktor-Heinks Minn. Ct. App. 2014
David P. Cook v. Wendi C. Wicktor-Heinks Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.
In re the Civil Commitment of Ince 847 N.W.2d 13 Minn. 2014
In re the Civil Commitment of Ince 847 N.W.2d 13 Minn. 2014
But the doctrine of stare decisis requires that we not overturn our previous construction, now “part of the statute as though written therein,” Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc., without a compelling reason to do so.
Gretsch v. Vantium Capital, Inc. 846 N.W.2d 424 Minn. 2014
Gretsch v. Vantium Capital, Inc. 846 N.W.2d 424 Minn. 2014
See Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.