Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Medtronic, Inc. v. Advanced Bionics Corp., 630 N.W.2d 438.

58 citing documents.

Schumacher v. Schumacher 676 N.W.2d 685 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
d. Advancement of the forum’s governmental interest This factor goes to which law would “most effectively advance a ‘significant interest of the forum’ state.” Medtronic
Edina Community Lutheran Church v. State 673 N.W.2d 517 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Edina Community Lutheran Church v. State 673 N.W.2d 517 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Danielson v. National Supply Co. 670 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Danielson v. National Supply Co. 670 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Rather, this factor applies “primarily to consensual transactions where the parties desire advance notice of which state law will govern in future disputes.” Medtronic, (citation omitted).
Jacobson v. Universal Underwriters Insurance Group 645 N.W.2d 741 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission v. Minnesota Twins Partnership 638 N.W.2d 214 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission v. Minnesota Twins Partnership 638 N.W.2d 214 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Medtronic, -57 (Minn.App.2001) (upholding injunction ordering California competitor to comply with Minnesota noncompete agreement).