Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Ryan Contracting, Inc. v. Jag Investments, Inc., 634 N.W.2d 176.

28 citing documents.

In re Application of Skyline Materials, Ltd. 835 N.W.2d 472 Minn. 2013
In re Application of Skyline Materials, Ltd. 835 N.W.2d 472 Minn. 2013
“Until served pursuant to rule 4.03, one is not made a ‘party’ to an action.” Ryan Contracting, Inc. v. JAG Invs., Inc., overruled on other grounds by Mavco, -57 (Minn.2007).
In re Civil Commitment of Lonergan 811 N.W.2d 635 Minn. 2012
In re Civil Commitment of Lonergan 811 N.W.2d 635 Minn. 2012
See Ryan Contracting, Inc. v. JAG Invs., Inc., , 186 n. 11 (Minn.2001) (explaining that where a rule simply fills a gap or a silence in a statute, the rule may govern), overruled on other grounds by Mavco
Eclipse Architectural Group, Inc. v. Lam 799 N.W.2d 632 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Eclipse Architectural Group, Inc. v. Lam 799 N.W.2d 632 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
The purpose of the mechanic’s lien statutes “is to protect parties who provide services, work and materials, and a liberal construction is accorded to accomplish that purpose.” 6 Steven J. Kirsch, Minnesota Practice § 32.1 (3d ed.1990); see Ryan Contracting, Inc. v. JAG Inv., Inc., (stating that “[t]he purpose of the Mechanics’ Lien Statute is to protect the rights of workmen and materialmen who furnish labor and material in the improvement of real estate”), overruled on other grounds by Mavco,
SHAMROCK DEVELOPMENT, INC. v. Smith 754 N.W.2d 377 Minn. 2008
SHAMROCK DEVELOPMENT, INC. v. Smith 754 N.W.2d 377 Minn. 2008
“Where a party simultaneously invokes the court’s jurisdiction on the merits and asks the court to rule on a jurisdictional defense, waiver will not result unless other circumstances clearly demonstrate the party’s acquiescence to the court’s jurisdiction.” Ryan Contracting, Inc. v. JAG Invs., Inc.; overruled on other grounds by Mavco, see also Minn. R. Civ.
Mavco, Inc. v. Eggink 739 N.W.2d 148 Minn. 2007
Mavco, Inc. v. Eggink 739 N.W.2d 148 Minn. 2007
See Ryan Contracting, Inc. v. JAG Investments, Inc.
Peterson v. Johnson 733 N.W.2d 502 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Peterson v. Johnson 733 N.W.2d 502 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Ryan Contracting, Inc. v. JAG Invs., Inc.
Mavco, Inc. v. Eggink 720 N.W.2d 841 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Mavco, Inc. v. Eggink 720 N.W.2d 841 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Ryan Contracting, Inc. v. JAG Inv., Inc.
Harrison Ex Rel. Harrison v. Harrison 713 N.W.2d 74 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Harrison Ex Rel. Harrison v. Harrison 713 N.W.2d 74 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Ryan Contracting, Inc. v. JAG Inv., Inc.
Twin City Pipe Trades Service Ass'n v. Peak Mechanical, Inc. 689 N.W.2d 549 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Twin City Pipe Trades Service Ass'n v. Peak Mechanical, Inc. 689 N.W.2d 549 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
See, e.g., Ryan Contracting, Inc. v. JAG Invs., Inc., (applying the strict standard to the one-year time limit of section 514.12); Merle’s Constr.
Eischen Cabinet Co. v. Hildebrandt 683 N.W.2d 813 Minn. 2004
Eischen Cabinet Co. v. Hildebrandt 683 N.W.2d 813 Minn. 2004
Ryan Contracting, Inc. v. JAG Investments, Inc.
Eischen Cabinet Co. v. Hildebrandt 671 N.W.2d 609 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Eischen Cabinet Co. v. Hildebrandt 671 N.W.2d 609 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Ryan Contracting, Inc. v. JAG Invs., Inc.
Weinberger v. Maplewood Review 668 N.W.2d 667 Minn. 2003
Weinberger v. Maplewood Review 668 N.W.2d 667 Minn. 2003
See Ryan Contracting, Inc. v. JAG Invs., Inc., (“Statutory construction is * * * a question of law which we review de novo.”).
Nieszner v. St. Paul School District No. 625 643 N.W.2d 645 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Nieszner v. St. Paul School District No. 625 643 N.W.2d 645 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Ryan Contracting, Inc. v. JAG Inv., Inc.
Mellett v. Fairview Health Services 634 N.W.2d 421 Minn. 2001
Mellett v. Fairview Health Services 634 N.W.2d 421 Minn. 2001
Resolution of Mellett’s claim is governed by our recent decision in Ryan Contracting, Inc. v. JAG Investments, Inc., where we held, among other things, that service of process on one member of a joint venture does not constitute service on the other members of the joint venture for statute of limitations purposes.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by