Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Baker v. Best Buy Stores, LP, 812 N.W.2d 177.

25 citing documents.

Leo Gadbois v. Irvine Hill Condominium Association Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Baker v. Best Buy Stores, LP, rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
SECURA Insurance Company, as subrogee of Lance Goettl d/b/a TLG Farm Partnership v. Deere & Company, Kibble Equipment … Minn. Ct. App. 2024
SECURA Insurance Company, as subrogee of Lance Goettl d/b/a TLG Farm Partnership v. Deere & Company, Kibble Equipment … Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Baker v. Best Buy Stores, LP, rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
Edgard Mariano v. Raiser, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2023
However, if a complaint contains a contract- based claim, “the court may consider the entire written contract when the complaint refers to the contract and the contract is central to the claims alleged.” Baker v. Best Buy Stores, LP, (quotation omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
Deborah Jane Clapp v. Rochelle Cox, in her official capacity as Interim Superintendent of Minneapolis Public Schools, et … Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Deborah Jane Clapp v. Rochelle Cox, in her official capacity as Interim Superintendent of Minneapolis Public Schools, et … Minn. Ct. App. 2023
And if a complaint contains a contract- based claim, “the court may consider the entire written contract when the complaint refers to the contract and the contract is central to the claims alleged.” Baker v. Best Buy Stores, LP, (quotation omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
Lynn Peterson v. Clark Lake Homes, Inc., et al., Shelley Peterson Minn. Ct. App. 2022
P. 9.02; see, e.g., Baker v. Best Buy Stores, LP, -84 (Minn. App. 2012) (reasoning that, like Fed.
BDS Laundry Management Company, vs Haven, LLC, et al., ABC Corporation, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Additionally, if the complaint contains a contract-based claim, “the court ‘may consider the entire written contract when the complaint refers to the contract and the 6 contract is central to the claims alleged.’” Baker v. Best Buy Stores, LP, (quoting In re Hennepin Cty.
Jeremy J. Cobb v. Dwight J. Schultz, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See Baker v. Best Buy Stores, LP, (upholding unfavorable retail service contract provision that terminated the contract upon replacement of a purchased good, because the purchasers agreed to the contract term and “received the benefit of the bargain” with the retailer), review denied (Minn. Apr.
Amanda M. Doub v. Life Time Fitness, Inc., Muska Electric Company Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“In deciding a motion to dismiss, the court may consider the entire written contract when the complaint refers to the contract and the contract is central to the claims alleged.” Baker v. Best Buy Stores, LP, d 177, 180 (Minn. App. 2012) (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. Apr.
Town Center Office Plaza Association, Inc., Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Particularity requires that the association allege “ultimate facts.” Baker v. Best Buy Stores, LP, d 177, 182 (Minn. App. 2012).
First Class Valet Services, LLC v. Gleason 892 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
First Class Valet Services, LLC v. Gleason 892 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Baker v. Best Buy Stores, LP, review denied (Minn. Apr.
Waseca County, et al v. Minnesota Department of Transportation Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Waseca County, et al v. Minnesota Department of Transportation Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“In deciding a motion to dismiss, [a] court ‘may consider the entire written contract when the complaint refers to the contract and the contract is central to the claims alleged.’” Baker v. Best Buy Stores, LP, (quoting In re Hennepin Cty.
Angeles v. Medtronic, Inc. 863 N.W.2d 404 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
A14-1151 A14-1152 A14-1153 A14-1154 Paul V. Angeles, et al. (A14-1149), Charlene Mead, et al. (A14-1150), Charles Starovasnik, Jr. … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Angeles v. Medtronic, Inc. 863 N.W.2d 404 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“[T]he circumstances required to be pled with particularity under Rule [9.02] are the time, place, and contents of the false representations, as well as the identity of the person making the misrepresentation and what he obtained thereby.” Baker v. Best Buy Stores, LP, (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. Apr.
A14-1151 A14-1152 A14-1153 A14-1154 Paul V. Angeles, et al. (A14-1149), Charlene Mead, et al. (A14-1150), Charles Starovasnik, Jr. … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“[T]he circumstances required to be pled with particularity under Rule [9.02] are the time, place, and contents 31 of the false representations, as well as the identity of the person making the misrepresentation and what he obtained thereby.” Baker v. Best Buy Stores, LP, (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. Apr.
Elfi E. Janssen, et al v. Lommen, Abdo, Cole, King & Stageberg, P. A., et al., Sibley Holdings, … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Elfi E. Janssen, et al v. Lommen, Abdo, Cole, King & Stageberg, P. A., et al., Sibley Holdings, … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Baker v. Best Buy Stores, LP, -84 (Minn. App. 2012), review denied (Minn. Apr.
Capital Midwest Fund, LP, et al v. Douglas E. Johnson, et al., Steven Quay, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Capital Midwest Fund, LP, et al v. Douglas E. Johnson, et al., Steven Quay, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“[T]he circumstances required to be pled with particularity under Rule [9.02] are the time, place, and contents of the false representations, as well as the identity of the person making the misrepresentation and what he obtained thereby.” Baker v. Best 12 Buy Stores, LP, (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. Apr.
Graphic Communications Local 1B Health & Welfare Fund "A" v. CVS Caremark Corp. 833 N.W.2d 403 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Graphic Communications Local 1B Health & Welfare Fund "A" v. CVS Caremark Corp. 833 N.W.2d 403 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
P. 9.02; Baker v. Best Buy Stores, LP, review denied (Minn. Apr.