Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Webb Business Promotions, Inc. v. American Electronics & Entertainment Corp., 617 N.W.2d 67.

23 citing documents.

BGD, LLC v. Stephen K. Burns, Pacer Minerals, LLC, a South Dakota Limited Liability Company, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Corp., (contemplating an agreement between parties for a valid accord and satisfaction of a contractual agreement).
Gerald Bernard v. Wealth Enhancement Group LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Gerald Bernard v. Wealth Enhancement Group LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Corp., (“The purpose of accord and satisfaction is to allow parties to resolve disputes without judicial intervention by discharging all rights and duties under a contract in exchange for a stated performance, usually a payment of a sum of money.”) Bernard mentions accord and satisfaction only when descr
David Levy, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Leslie E. Sheehy Lee v. Travis W. Kalis, County of Le Sueur Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Leslie E. Sheehy Lee v. Travis W. Kalis, County of Le Sueur Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Detailed by Design LLC, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Isanti Estates, LLC v. McCarthy Well Company, McCullough & Sons, Incorporated d/b/a McCullough & Sons Well Drilling, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Isanti Estates, LLC v. McCarthy Well Company, McCullough & Sons, Incorporated d/b/a McCullough & Sons Well Drilling, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
& Entm’t Corp., (“The agreement necessary to form a contract need not be express, but may be implied from circumstances that clearly and unequivocally indicate the intention of the parties to enter into a contract.”); TNT Props., (“Minnesota fo
Lewis v. West Side Community Health Services, Inc. 802 N.W.2d 853 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Lewis v. West Side Community Health Services, Inc. 802 N.W.2d 853 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
& Entm’t Corp., (“The agreement necessary to form a contract need not be express, but may be implied from circumstances that clearly and unequivocally indicate the intention of the parties to enter into a contract.”); McArdle v. Williams, 193 Minn. 433, 438 , 258 N.W.
State v. Spence 768 N.W.2d 104 Minn. 2009
State v. Spence 768 N.W.2d 104 Minn. 2009
& Entm’t, -76 (Minn.2000) (stating that agreements can be implied from “circumstances that clearly and unequivocally indicate the intention of the parties to enter into a contract”) (citing Shema v. Thorpe Bros., 240 Minn. 459, 465 , ).
In Re the Civil Commitment of Stone 711 N.W.2d 831 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
In Re the Civil Commitment of Stone 711 N.W.2d 831 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Border State Bank of Greenbush v. Bagley Livestock Exchange, Inc. 690 N.W.2d 326 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Border State Bank of Greenbush v. Bagley Livestock Exchange, Inc. 690 N.W.2d 326 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Johnson v. Wright 682 N.W.2d 671 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Johnson v. Wright 682 N.W.2d 671 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
& Entm’t Corp., (listing elements that are generally required to establish the defense of accord and satisfaction).
Brekke v. THM Biomedical, Inc. 667 N.W.2d 452 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Brekke v. THM Biomedical, Inc. 667 N.W.2d 452 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Nelson v. American Family Insurance Group 651 N.W.2d 499 Minn. 2002
Nelson v. American Family Insurance Group 651 N.W.2d 499 Minn. 2002