Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Miller v. Hennen, 438 N.W.2d 366.

31 citing documents.

ROA Rochester v. City of Byron Minn. Ct. App. 2024
ROA Rochester v. City of Byron Minn. Ct. App. 2024
A purchaser has implied notice when they have “actual knowledge of facts which would put one on further inquiry.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota, by its Commissioner of Transportation v. Robert P. Carlson, North Shore Federal Credit Union, Below. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota, by its Commissioner of Transportation v. Robert P. Carlson, North Shore Federal Credit Union, Below. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“The burden is on the party resisting the prior unrecorded title to prove that he purchased or acquired such title in good faith.”
Amos Graves v. Michael Wayman, First Minnesota Bank 859 N.W.2d 791 Minn. 2015
Graves v. Wayman 816 N.W.2d 655 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Graves v. Wayman 816 N.W.2d 655 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
(stating that those seeking to be bona fide purchasers have the burden of proving their good-faith-purchaser status); (“The burden is on the party resisting the prior unrecorded title to prove that he purchased or acquired such title in good faith.”); Goette v. Howe, 232 Minn. 168, 174 , (noting that defendant has an “affirmative burden” of proof in establishing absence of notice); Errett v.
MidCountry Bank v. Krueger 782 N.W.2d 238 Minn. 2010
MidCountry Bank v. Krueger 782 N.W.2d 238 Minn. 2010
MidCountry Bank v. Krueger 762 N.W.2d 278 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
MidCountry Bank v. Krueger 762 N.W.2d 278 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Gabler v. Fedoruk 756 N.W.2d 725 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Gabler v. Fedoruk 756 N.W.2d 725 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
(stating that adverse claims to property are subject to equitable relief).
Washington Mutual Bank, F.A. v. Elfelt 756 N.W.2d 501 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Washington Mutual Bank, F.A. v. Elfelt 756 N.W.2d 501 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Stone v. Jetmar Properties, LLC 733 N.W.2d 480 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Stone v. Jetmar Properties, LLC 733 N.W.2d 480 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Real Estate Equity Strategies, LLC v. Jones 720 N.W.2d 352 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Real Estate Equity Strategies, LLC v. Jones 720 N.W.2d 352 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
§ 557.02 (2004) (explaining impact of notice of lis pendens); (defining purchaser in good faith).
Chaney v. Minneapolis Community Development Agency 641 N.W.2d 328 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Chaney v. Minneapolis Community Development Agency 641 N.W.2d 328 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
-70 (Minn.1989) (quotation omitted); see also Latourell v. Hobart, 135 Minn. 109 , 113—14, 160 N.W.
Claflin v. Commercial State Bank of Two Harbors 487 N.W.2d 242 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Claflin v. Commercial State Bank of Two Harbors 487 N.W.2d 242 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Comstock & Davis, Inc. v. G.D.S. & Associates 481 N.W.2d 82 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Comstock & Davis, Inc. v. G.D.S. & Associates 481 N.W.2d 82 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Cf., (“A purchaser in good faith is one who gives valuable consideration without actual, implied or constructive notice of inconsistent outstanding rights of others.”) (emphasis added).
Chergosky v. Crosstown Bell, Inc. 463 N.W.2d 522 Minn. 1990
Chergosky v. Crosstown Bell, Inc. 463 N.W.2d 522 Minn. 1990
Levine v. Bradley Real Estate Trust 457 N.W.2d 237 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Levine v. Bradley Real Estate Trust 457 N.W.2d 237 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Implied notice occurs where one has “actual knowledge of facts which would put one on further inquiry.” (quoting Anderson, d at 384-85 ).
Chergosky v. Crosstown Bell, Inc. 454 N.W.2d 654 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Chergosky v. Crosstown Bell, Inc. 454 N.W.2d 654 Minn. Ct. App. 1990

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by