Cited by

Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, aff’d

Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, aff’d

But an appeal is not moot when a party could be afforded effective relief.” Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, (quotations omitted), aff’d

See Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, d 449, 453 (Minn. 2018) (permitting courts to consult dictionaries to discern a statutorily undefined word’s meaning).

“When a statute does not define terms, we may look to the dictionary definition of those words to determine if a statute has a plain, unambiguous meaning.” d 871, 877 (Minn. 2024); see also Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC

Minnesota’s collection agency statutes do not specifically define the term “indebtedness.” “When a statute does not define terms, we may look to the dictionary definition of those words to determine if a statute has a plain, unambiguous meaning.” d 871, 877 (Minn. 2024); see also Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC

Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, (), aff’d

See Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, aff’d, (stating that appellate courts review a district court’s denial of default judgment for an abuse of discretion).

A party seeking default judgment “generally need do no more than aver that the defendant has failed to timely answer the complaint.” Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, -18 (Minn. App. 2017), aff’d

“We review an entry of default judgment for [an] abuse of discretion.” Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, aff’d

“Mootness has been described as the doctrine of standing set in a time frame: The requisite personal interest that must exist at the commencement of the litigation (standing) must continue throughout its existence (mootness).” Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, (quotation omitted), aff’d

See Laymon v. Minn. Premiere Props., LLC, (“[A] person’s property devolves to a residuary devisee ‘[u]pon death’ of a testator, which is to say, immediately.”) .

“[W]here the Legislature has not provided definitions of the relevant terms, [appellate courts] may consider dictionary definitions to determine a word’s common usage.” Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, d 449, 453 (Minn. 2018); see also Quinn v. LMC NE Minneapolis Holdings, LLC, (quoting this aspect of Laymon in an eviction appeal), rev. granted (June 29, 2022) and appeal dismissed

See Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, (“[W]e may consider dictionary definitions to determine a word’s common usage.”); see also Bank Midwest, Minn., Iowa, N.A.

26, 2001); Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, (concluding that “default judgment may not be entered against a defendant over whom the court has no personal jurisdiction”), aff’d

See Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, (concluding that a devolution at death is a transfer by succession).

“We review an entry of default judgment for abuse of discretion.” Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, aff’d, cf. Frontier Ins.

See Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, - 15 (Minn. App. 2017) (“Minnesota has long recognized the principle that title to a decedent’s estate vests automatically in the decedent’s heirs or devisees at the moment of his death.” (quotation omitted)), aff’d

LLC, - 18 (Minn. App. 2017), aff’d, ; see Minn. R. Civ.

Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, aff’d

See Minn. Stat. 524.3-101 (stating that “[u]pon death, a person’s real and personal property devolves” (emphasis added)); Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, (noting that property devolves “upon death of the testator, which is to say, immediately” (quotation omitted)); In re Beachside I Homeowners Ass’n, (“Minnesota has long recognized the principle that title to a decedent’s estate vests automatically”).

The supreme court has elaborated that a quitclaim deed “passes only the estate which the grantor could lawfully convey.” Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, n.2 (Minn. 2018) (quoting Everest v. Ferris, 16 Minn. 26, 32 (1870)).

Laymon v. Minnesota Premier Props., LLC

Accordingly, “a valid, transferable ownership interest in real property devolves immediately upon a testator’s death to a person to whom the property is devised by the testator’s will.” Laymon v. Minnesota Premier Props., LLC , aff’d

LLC, -18 (Minn. App. 2017), aff’d, see Minn. R. Civ.

Laymon v. Minn. Premiere Props., LLC

Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, aff’d, d 449 (Minn. 2018).

Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, (providing that, when construing a statute, we consider context to define terms).

LMC argues instead that the plain language of the statute requires us to reverse the district court’s conclusion that Quinn was an “other regular occupant.” The parties direct us to different dictionary definitions of the word “regular” in support of their competing interpretations of the phrase “other regular occupant.” See Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, (stating that in the absence of a statutory definition of a term, “we may consider dictionary definitions to determine a word’s common u

“Attorney fees and costs reasonably necessary in an action to clear clouds on title resulting from slander of title are special damages that are recoverable in a slander-of-title claim.” Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC , (quotation omitted), aff’d

“[W]here the Legislature has not provided definitions of the relevant terms, we may consider dictionary definitions to determine a word’s common usage.” Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC

Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, aff’d

Premier Pr ops., LLC , (citations omitted), aff’d, see also Minn. Stat. § 484.011 (2020) (“The district court shall also be a probate court.”); (stating that probate courts have “been consolidated into district courts of general jurisdiction ”).

App. 2017) (quotation omitted), aff’d

“By Minnesota statut e, the personal representative has standing to assert claims on beha lf of the decedent’s estate.” Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, (quotation omitted), aff’d, d 449 (Minn. 2018).

(reviewing decision not to reopen a default judgm ent under abuse of discretion); see also Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, (“We review an entry of default judgment for abuse of discretion.”) , aff’d, ; Moir v. Moir , 5-96 (Minn. App. 1987) (reviewing denial of motion to vacate default judgment under abuse of discretion).5 In this matter, husband requested that the district court proceed by default without any further hearings, pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 518.13, subd

“[D]efault judgment may not be entered against a defendant over whom the court has no personal jurisdiction.” Laymon v. Minnesota Premier Prop s., LLC, 9-20 (Minn. App. 2017), aff’d, .

Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC , aff’d, .

Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC

See Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC, (stating that there is no longer a separate proba te court system in Minnesota,” and “there is no district court which is not also a probate court, and no distinction between the courts” (quotations omitted)), aff’d

See Laymon v. Minn. Premier Props., LLC , , 452 (Minn. 2018) (reviewing question of Minnesota law de novo).