Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Rosillo, 651 N.W.2d 499.
-
State of Minnesota,
Minn. 2021
See also State v. Rosillo , No. C2-00-1610, 2001 WL 881279, at *2 (Minn. App. July 31, 2001) (ruling that no intent to perform is required, only “some conduct consistent with fulfilling [the] offer” (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted)), aff’d, (order).
-
Bella Vista Condominium Association, et al., Appellants,
Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Grp., (quotation omitted).
- Bert Lawrence Pexsa, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
-
Jayson Dock, et al., Appellants,
Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Grp., res judicata does not apply because the two actions are not identical to each other.
- All Finish Concrete, Inc. v. Erickson 899 N.W.2d 557 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
- Sandra Castillo as Personal Representative of the Estate of Jose Luis Estrada-Martinez v. American Standard Insurance Company of … 889 N.W.2d 591 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
- Stand Up Multipositional Advantage MRI, P.A. v. American Family Insurance Company, a Wisconsin corporation, Michael Schultz, Ilya Knyazev, … 889 N.W.2d 543 Minn. 2017
-
Kimberly-Clark Corporation & Subsidiaries, Relators/Cross-Respondents v. Commissioner of Revenue, Respondent/Cross-Appellant.
880 N.W.2d 844
Minn. 2016
Grp., (holding that where the trial court grants summary judgment based on the application of a statute to undisputed facts, the result is a legal conclusion that appellate courts review de novo); Progressive Specialty Ins.
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company v. Angela Mary Lennartson, Katie Foss 872 N.W.2d 524 Minn. 2015
- David J. Mach, Jr. v. Wells Concrete Products Co., and CCMSI, Relators, and Blue Cross Blue Shield, Operating … 866 N.W.2d 921 Minn. 2015
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, (A14-132), (A14-224) v. Angela Mary Lennartson, (A14-132), Katie Foss, (A14-224). 857 N.W.2d 713 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
- Opheim v. County of Norman 784 N.W.2d 90 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
- Barth v. Stenwick 761 N.W.2d 502 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
-
Stewart v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co.
727 N.W.2d 679
Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Group, (holding that interpretation of the no-fault act is a question of law, which appellate courts review de novo).
- Heine v. Simon 702 N.W.2d 752 Minn. 2005
-
Pemberton v. Theis
668 N.W.2d 692
Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Group, the Minnesota Supreme Court declined to apply the doctrines of res judicata, collateral estoppel, or accord and satisfaction in an action by an insured to recover no-fault benefits from her insurance company when the insurance company had previously satisfied a tort judgment of liability as the liability
- Mutual Service Casualty Insurance Co. v. League of Minnesota Cities Insurance Trust 659 N.W.2d 755 Minn. 2003
-
Arbitration of Olson v. Auto-Owners Insurance Co.
659 N.W.2d 283
Minn. Ct. App. 2003
*287 Group, (quotation omitted).