Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Morse v. City of Waterville, 458 N.W.2d 728.

26 citing documents.

Pioneer Bank v. Might Enterprises, Inc., et al., The 209 Group, LLC, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2026
22 A. Irreparable Harm to Pioneer Bank To obtain a temporary injunction, the movant must establish that their rights would be “irreparably injured before a trial on the merits is held.” Miller, d at 712; (“The failure to show irreparable harm is, by itself, a sufficient ground upon which to deny a preliminary injunction.”), rev. denied (Minn. Sept.
Minnesota Duty Disabled Association (MNDDA), a Minnesota nonprofit corporation v. State of Minnesota Public Employees Retirement Association (PERA) Minn. Ct. App. 2024
rev. denied (Minn. Sept.
Douglas J. Malark, Malark Family Trust v. Sheryl F. Malark Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Further, the irremediable damage “must be of such a nature that money alone could not suffice.” - 30 (Minn. App. 1990), rev. denied (Minn. Sept.
Teamsters Local 320 v. Minnesota Judicial Branch Minn. Ct. App. 2022
DSCC, d at 286; see Morse v. City of Waterville , rev. denied (Minn. Sept.
Nancy S. Schneider, et al v. Merrill G. Oestreich, Linda Oestreich, intervenor Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Morse v. City of Waterville , review denied (Minn. Sept.
In the Matter of the John P. Weitzel and Mary M. Weitzel 2007 Irrevocable Trust F/B/O Terese M. … Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Morse v. City of Waterville , , review denied (Minn. Sept.
Aase Law Firm, PLLC v. Aria Law Firm, P.A., et al Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Aase Law Firm, PLLC v. Aria Law Firm, P.A., et al Minn. Ct. App. 2016
The irremediable damage “must be of such a nature that money alone could not suffice.” -30 (Minn. App. 1990), review denied (Minn. Sept.
Advance Contract Equipment and Design LC, d/b/a, Rapids Foodservice Contract and Design v. Kevin LaMere, Horizon Equipment LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Advance Contract Equipment and Design LC, d/b/a, Rapids Foodservice Contract and Design v. Kevin LaMere, Horizon Equipment LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
review denied (Minn. Sept.
Haley v. Forcelle 669 N.W.2d 48 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Haley v. Forcelle 669 N.W.2d 48 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
-30 (Minn.App.1990), review denied (Minn. Sept.
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
(finding insufficient showing of irreparable harm where injury suffered by plaintiff discharged from employment was primarily' economic), review denied (Minn. Sept.
Medtronic, Inc. v. Advanced Bionics Corp. 630 N.W.2d 438 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Medtronic, Inc. v. Advanced Bionics Corp. 630 N.W.2d 438 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
review denied (Minn. Sept.
Eason v. Independent School District No. 11 598 N.W.2d 414 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Eason v. Independent School District No. 11 598 N.W.2d 414 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
As a general rule, “[t]he failure to show irreparable harm is, by itself, a sufficient ground upon which to deny a preliminary injunction.” *419 (citations omitted), review denied (Minn. Sept.
Unlimited Horizon Marketing, Inc. v. Precision Hub, Inc. 533 N.W.2d 63 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Unlimited Horizon Marketing, Inc. v. Precision Hub, Inc. 533 N.W.2d 63 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
As a general rule, “the failure to show irreparable harm is, by itself, a sufficient ground upon which to deny a preliminary injunction.” (citations omitted), pet.
Humenansky v. Minnesota Board of Medical Examiners 525 N.W.2d 559 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Humenansky v. Minnesota Board of Medical Examiners 525 N.W.2d 559 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
See AMF Pinspotters, Inc. v. Harkins Bowling, Inc., 260 Minn. 499, 504 , (party seeking relief has heavy burden of proof regarding need for relief); (the moving party’s failure to demonstrate irreparable harm is reason to deny injunctive relief), pet.
Pacific Equipment & Irrigation, Inc. v. Toro Co. 519 N.W.2d 911 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Pacific Equipment & Irrigation, Inc. v. Toro Co. 519 N.W.2d 911 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
-30 (Minn.App.1990) (to be irreparable, injury must be of such a nature that money alone could not suffice), pet.
Carl Bolander & Sons Co. v. City of Minneapolis 488 N.W.2d 804 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Carl Bolander & Sons Co. v. City of Minneapolis 488 N.W.2d 804 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
“The grant of a temporary injunction is an extraordinary remedy, left largely [to] a matter of judicial discretion.” pet.