Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Rasmussen v. Two Harbors Fish Co., 832 N.W.2d 790.

232 citing documents.

Nicol Nagel, individually and ESY Investments, LLC, a California limited liability company v. Tracy A. Westen 865 N.W.2d 325 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
This record reasonably supports the district court’s finding that the client agreement received into evidence is “[t]he account agreement between [appellants] and Ameriprise.” (stating that appellate courts review the district court’s factual findings for clear error, examining the record to determine if it contains reasonable evidence to support the district court’s findings).
State of Minnesota v. Delbert Keith Sybrandt Minn. Ct. App. 2015
We “view the evidence in the light most favorable” to the outcome and will affirm the district court’s decision “if there is 8 reasonable evidence in the record to support the court’s findings.” (quotations omitted).
In re the Marriage of: Michelle Curtis v. Christopher John Hanna Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Rahn's Oil & Propane, Inc. v. Ettel Logistics, Inc., ELI Logistics, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Rahn's Oil & Propane, Inc. v. Ettel Logistics, Inc., ELI Logistics, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
To conclude that findings of fact are clearly erroneous [an appellate court] must 7 be left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” (quotations and citations omitted).
In re the Marriage of: Michelle Curtis v. Christopher John Hanna Minn. Ct. App. 2015
to support the [district] court’s findings.” (quotation omitted).
Vickie Williams and o/b/o M. W. v. Phillip A. Rimmer Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Vickie Williams and o/b/o M. W. v. Phillip A. Rimmer Minn. Ct. App. 2015
To determine if findings are clearly erroneous, this court examines the record to see if “there is reasonable evidence in the record to support the [district] court’s findings.” (quotation omitted).
Mark G. Warrington v. Donald E. Falk, Robert A. Schmaltz Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Mark G. Warrington v. Donald E. Falk, Robert A. Schmaltz Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Whether the elements of adverse possession have been established is a question of fact, Ganje, d at 266, which we review for clear error, “view[ing] the evidence in the light most favorable” to the district court’s ruling and reversing only if we are “left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made,”
Joy Folie v. Aging Joyfully, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Kaytee Hooser v. Keith Anderson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Kaytee Hooser v. Keith Anderson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
5 made.” (quotation omitted).
Joy Folie v. Aging Joyfully, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
To conclude that findings of fact are clearly erroneous we must be left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” (quotations and citations omitted).
Wayne Earl Dahl v. Stephen Sean Cummings Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Wayne Earl Dahl v. Stephen Sean Cummings Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Findings of fact are clearly erroneous when we are “left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” (quotation omitted).
Michele Sykes v. Rochester City Council, City of Rochester Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Michele Sykes v. Rochester City Council, City of Rochester Minn. Ct. App. 2015
That is, we examine the record to see if there is reasonable evidence in the 9 record to support the court’s findings.” (quotations and citations omitted).
Timothy John Bozikowski v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Timothy John Bozikowski v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“To conclude that findings of fact are clearly erroneous we must be left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” (quotation omitted).
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
in the light most favorable to the verdict,” they are unsupported by “reasonable evidence” and “le[ave an appellate court] with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” (quotations omitted).
Anita W. Sluck v. Terence E. Rapacz Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Anita W. Sluck v. Terence E. Rapacz Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Guava LLC, Michael Dugas v. Spencer Merkel, Qwest Communications Corporation, Respondents,John Doe 173.23.48.174, John Doe 24.111.103.45, John Doe … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Guava LLC, Michael Dugas v. Spencer Merkel, Qwest Communications Corporation, Respondents,John Doe 173.23.48.174, John Doe 24.111.103.45, John Doe … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(holding that appellate courts examine evidence in light most favorable to district court’s findings).
City of Duluth v. 120 East Superior Street, Duluth, Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
City of Duluth v. 120 East Superior Street, Duluth, Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(an appellate court reviews “the district court’s factual findings for clear error”).3 Appellants assert that because law enforcement did not purchase any illegal substances from LPOE after the 30-day abatement period, “[t]here was not a shred of evidence at trial” that appellants had not
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: J. S. and M. S., Parents. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: J. S. and M. S., Parents. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“[W]hen determining whether a finding of fact is clearly erroneous, [appellate courts] view the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict.” d 790, 797 (Minn. 2013).
Barrow v. State 845 N.W.2d 555 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Barrow v. State 845 N.W.2d 555 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
But the district court implicitly found that Barrow’s companion in the car was "his wife,” and we defer to the district court’s factual findings unless they are shown to be clearly erroneous