Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Tereault v. Palmer, 413 N.W.2d 283.

220 citing documents.

Selective Insurance Company of South Carolina v. Quoc D. Huynh, Quoc D. Huynh, Third-party v. Nathan Hintze d/b/a … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. Dec.
Joel Wells v. Rick E. Mattox Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Joel Wells v. Rick E. Mattox Minn. Ct. App. 2016
9 (Minn. App. 1987), review denied (Minn. Dec.
In the Matter of the WELFARE OF the Child Of: J.P.-S. and J.D.F., Parents 880 N.W.2d 868 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In the Matter of the WELFARE OF the Child Of: J.P.-S. and J.D.F., Parents 880 N.W.2d 868 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
And, because this court is an error-correcting court, Sefkow v. 8 Sefkow, we cannot impose such a burden on the district court in the absence of authority mandating such consideration, (“[T]he task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.”), review denied (Minn. Dec.
Stand Up Multipositional Advantage MRI, P.A. v. American Family Insurance Company, a Wisconsin corporation, Michael Schultz, Ilya Knyazev, … 878 N.W.2d 21 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Newman-Lakka Cancer Foundation v. Christine E. Briggs Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Newman-Lakka Cancer Foundation v. Christine E. Briggs Minn. Ct. App. 2016
10 (“[T]he task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.”), review denied (Minn. Dec.
Lois St. Aubin v. Caseys Retail Company d/b/a Caseys General Store Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Lois St. Aubin v. Caseys Retail Company d/b/a Caseys General Store Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Credit Union, d 463, 466 (Minn. App. 1998) (stating that “[t]his court, as an error correcting court, is without authority to change the law”), review denied (Minn. June 17, 1998); (“[T]he task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.”), review denied (Minn. Dec.
Troy K. Scheffler v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Troy K. Scheffler v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2016
As such, “the task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature.” review denied (Minn. Dec.
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Children of: D. M. J., D. A. H. and J. … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Children of: D. M. J., D. A. H. and J. … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
See B.A.B., d at 779; (“[T]he task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.”), review denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota v. James Nils Andersen Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. James Nils Andersen Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“[T]he task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.” review denied (Minn. Dec.
Ann Dorothy Ruch v. Robbert P. Osterholt Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Ann Dorothy Ruch v. Robbert P. Osterholt Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Finally, we note that “the task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.” review denied (Minn. Dec.
Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association v. National Football League, Regents of the University of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Minnesota Police and Peace Officers Association v. National Football League, Regents of the University of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(“Because this court is limited in its function to correcting errors it cannot create public policy.”), review denied (Minn. May 16, 2000); (“[T]he task of extending existing law falls to the 8 supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.”), review denied (Minn. Dec.
James M. Wollschlager v. Burnsville Volkswagen, Inc., d/b/a Luther Burnsville Volkswagen Minn. Ct. App. 2015
James M. Wollschlager v. Burnsville Volkswagen, Inc., d/b/a Luther Burnsville Volkswagen Minn. Ct. App. 2015
d 283, 286 (Minn. App. 1987) (“The task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.”) review denied (Minn. Dec.
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: A.N.T. and J.W., Parents. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: A.N.T. and J.W., Parents. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(stating that “the task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court”), review denied (Minn. Dec.
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Children of: K. E. L. and J. L. W., Parents. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Children of: K. E. L. and J. L. W., Parents. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“[T]he task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.” review denied (Minn. Dec.
Mark W. Tibbals v. Kerry G. Tibbals Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Mark W. Tibbals v. Kerry G. Tibbals Minn. Ct. App. 2014
it does not fall to this court.” review denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota v. Andrew William Serres Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Andrew William Serres Minn. Ct. App. 2014
review denied (Minn. Dec.
Patti Walsh, as Trustee for the Heirs and Next of Kin of Dean Patrick Walsh v. Flint Group … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Patti Walsh, as Trustee for the Heirs and Next of Kin of Dean Patrick Walsh v. Flint Group … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In fact, such a decision would also conflict with the well- established rule that “the task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or to the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.” review denied (Minn. Dec.
Resendiz v. State 832 N.W.2d 860 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Resendiz v. State 832 N.W.2d 860 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
It is well established that “the task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature.” review denied (Minn. Dec.
Russell v. Haji-Ali 826 N.W.2d 216 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Russell v. Haji-Ali 826 N.W.2d 216 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
(“[T]he task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.”), review denied (Minn. Dec.
Dukowitz v. Hannon Security Services 815 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Dukowitz v. Hannon Security Services 815 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
12, 1990); (declining to expand breach-of-warranty claim, explaining that “we believe the task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court”), review denied (Minn. Oct.
State v. Grigsby 806 N.W.2d 101 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
State v. Grigsby 806 N.W.2d 101 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
“[T]he task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.” review denied (Minn. Dec.
Butts ex rel. Iverson v. Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society 802 N.W.2d 839 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Butts ex rel. Iverson v. Evangelical Lutheran Good Samaritan Society 802 N.W.2d 839 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
See, (''[T]he task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.”), review denied (Minn. Dec.
State v. Hahn 799 N.W.2d 25 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Glorvigen v. Cirrus Design Corp. 796 N.W.2d 541 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Rohmiller v. Hart 799 N.W.2d 612 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Glorvigen v. Cirrus Design Corp. 796 N.W.2d 541 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
“[T]he task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.” review denied (Minn. Dec.
Rohmiller v. Hart 799 N.W.2d 612 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Like statutory law, Minnesota caselaw does not confer on courts the right to grant visitation to the sibling of a deceased parent, and “the task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.” review denied (Minn. Dec.
Minneapolis Grand, LLC v. Galt Funding LLC 791 N.W.2d 549 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Minneapolis Grand, LLC v. Galt Funding LLC 791 N.W.2d 549 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
(“[T]he task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court”), review denied (Minn. Dec.
City of Saint Paul v. Eldredge 788 N.W.2d 522 Minn. Ct. App. 2010

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by