Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Lundgren v. Green, 592 N.W.2d 888.

32 citing documents.

J. Moore L.L.C., Appellant, vs. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, Respondent Minn. Ct. App. 2025
J. Moore L.L.C., Appellant, vs. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company, Respondent Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“Service of process must accord strictly with statutory requirements.” (quotation omitted), rev. denied (Minn. July 28, 1999).
Mark Lehnertz, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“[S]ervice of process must accord strictly with statutory requirements.” rev. denied (Minn. July 28, 1999).
Charlene Karen Jundt, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
rev. denied (Minn. July 28, 1999).
Abdel Elnashar, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Livingston Financial, LLC, as successor in interest to US Bank, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
review denied (Minn. July 28, 1999).
Nichole Cox v. Mid-Minnesota Mutual Insurance Company Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Nichole Cox v. Mid-Minnesota Mutual Insurance Company Minn. Ct. App. 2017
review denied (Minn. July 28, 1999).
Enoch Klingbeil v. Krystal Lee Ramfjord Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Enoch Klingbeil v. Krystal Lee Ramfjord Minn. Ct. App. 2016
P. 4.03(a) provides that personal service shall be made “[u]pon an individual by delivering a copy to the individual personally or by leaving a copy at the individual’s usual place of abode with some person of suitable age and discretion then residing therein.” “[U]sual place of abode means present place of abode.” review denied (Minn. July 28, 1999) (quotation and quotation marks omitted).
Lynn D. Schwie v. Armco Unlimited, Inc., and Chicago Title Insurance Company as assignee of Countrywide Home Loans, … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Lynn D. Schwie v. Armco Unlimited, Inc., and Chicago Title Insurance Company as assignee of Countrywide Home Loans, … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
But “[s]ervice of process must accord strictly with statutory requirements.” (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. July 28, 1999).
Ann Dorothy Ruch v. Robbert P. Osterholt Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Ann Dorothy Ruch v. Robbert P. Osterholt Minn. Ct. App. 2015
review denied (Minn. July 28, 1999).
Steven J. Jaeger v. Palladium Holdings, LLC, Franklin Financial, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Steven J. Jaeger v. Palladium Holdings, LLC, Franklin Financial, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
To be effective, service of process “must accord strictly with statutory requirements.” (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. July 28, 1999).
Amaal Mohammed Shire v. Minneapolis Public Housing Authority, Lester L. Hall Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Amaal Mohammed Shire v. Minneapolis Public Housing Authority, Lester L. Hall Minn. Ct. App. 2014
To be effective, service of process “must accord strictly with statutory requirements.” (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. July 28, 1999).
Katherine JoAnn Lange, Thomas James Putman v. State Farm Insurance Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Katherine JoAnn Lange, Thomas James Putman v. State Farm Insurance Minn. Ct. App. 2014
To be effective, service of process “must accord strictly with statutory requirements.” (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. July 28, 1999).
Gregory B. Lindwall v. Country Preferred Insurance Company Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Gregory B. Lindwall v. Country Preferred Insurance Company Minn. Ct. App. 2014
review denied (Minn. July 28, 1999).
State v. BRIARD 784 N.W.2d 421 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. BRIARD 784 N.W.2d 421 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
We note that “[t]he location of a person’s usual place of abode is a question of fact, and the decision of the district court will not be reversed unless it is clearly erroneous.” (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. July 28, 1999).
Shamrock Development, Inc. v. Smith 737 N.W.2d 372 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Shamrock Development, Inc. v. Smith 737 N.W.2d 372 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Year 2001 Budget Appeal of Landgren v. Pipestone County Board of Commissioners 633 N.W.2d 875 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Year 2001 Budget Appeal of Landgren v. Pipestone County Board of Commissioners 633 N.W.2d 875 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
“ ‘Service of process in a manner not authorized by the rule is ineffective service.’ ” (quoting Tullis v. Federated Mut.
In Re the Welfare of T.D. 631 N.W.2d 806 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
In Re the Welfare of T.D. 631 N.W.2d 806 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
“ ‘Service of process in a manner not authorized by the rule is ineffective service.’ ” (quoting Tullis v. Federated Mut.
Turek v. A.S.P. of Moorhead, Inc. 618 N.W.2d 609 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Turek v. A.S.P. of Moorhead, Inc. 618 N.W.2d 609 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
“ ‘Service of process in a manner not authorized by the rule is ineffective service.’ ” (quoting Tullis v. Federated Mut.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by