Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Kaiser v. Northern States Power Co., 353 N.W.2d 899.

111 citing documents.

In the Matter of the Minnesota Racing Commission’s Approval of Running Aces Casino, Hotel & Racetrack’s Amended Plan … Minn. Ct. App. 2026
(stating that under collateral estoppel, “once an issue is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction, that determination is conclusive in subsequent suits based on a different cause of action involving a party to the prior litigation”).
William Miller v. Public Storage, a foreign Real Estate Investment Trust and third-party plaintiff, vs. Penelope Isleman, third-party … Minn. Ct. App. 2021
’s claim for partial summary judgment on respondent’s liability for the statutory violation after concluding that the claims in this case were brought by a m inor child and the claims in Isleman I were brought by an adult, so “none of the factual findings in [that case] are applicable to this case and collateral estoppel 11 does not apply” and quo ting from Kaiser v. N. States Power Co ., the principle that, “[a] basic prerequisite to the application of collateral estoppel is that the issue now
Dwaine C. Ratfield, Kathleen M. Ratfield, individually and as trustees of the Dwaine and Kathleen Ratfield Living Trust … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
All Finish Concrete, Inc. v. Erickson 899 N.W.2d 557 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
All Finish Concrete, Inc. v. Erickson 899 N.W.2d 557 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
*567 (quotation" omitted).
Kelly ex rel. Washburn v. Kraemer Construction, Inc. 896 N.W.2d 504 Minn. 2017
Kelly ex rel. Washburn v. Kraemer Construction, Inc. 896 N.W.2d 504 Minn. 2017
Joseph Roach, et al v. County of Becker, Thomas Alinder, et al., Gary Heitkamp Construction, Inc., et al., … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Kaiser v. N. Sta tes Power Co.
Michael Otto Hartmann v. Minnesota Department of Agriculture, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Michael Otto Hartmann v. Minnesota Department of Agriculture, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Matter of the Petition of Nationstar Mortgage, LLC, For a New Certificate of Title After … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Matter of the Petition of Nationstar Mortgage, LLC, For a New Certificate of Title After … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Res judicata applies only if a claim has been decided “by a court of competent jurisdiction.” (quotations omitted).
In re the Matter of the Petition of Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Matter of the Petition of Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as Trustee Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Res judicata applies only if a claim has been decided “by a court of competent jurisdiction.”
CitiMortgage, Inc., a New York corporation, in relation to Certificate of Title No. 27046 issued for land in … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
CitiMortgage, Inc., a New York corporation, in relation to Certificate of Title No. 27046 issued for land in … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Rucker v. Schmidt 794 N.W.2d 114 Minn. 2011
Rucker v. Schmidt 794 N.W.2d 114 Minn. 2011
Burns v. Commissioner of Revenue 787 N.W.2d 164 Minn. 2010
Burns v. Commissioner of Revenue 787 N.W.2d 164 Minn. 2010
(“Under collateral es-toppel or ‘issue preclusion,’ once an issue is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction, that determination is conclusive in subsequent suits based on a different *167 cause of action involving a party to the prior litigation.”).
Barth v. Stenwick 761 N.W.2d 502 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Barth v. Stenwick 761 N.W.2d 502 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. Lemmer 736 N.W.2d 650 Minn. 2007
State v. Lemmer 736 N.W.2d 650 Minn. 2007
This court bases its privity determination on whether the party to be es-topped (1) had a controlling participation in the first action, (2) had an active self-interest in the previous litigation, or (3) had a right to appeal from a prior judgment
Zurich American Insurance Co. v. Bjelland 710 N.W.2d 64 Minn. 2006
Zurich American Insurance Co. v. Bjelland 710 N.W.2d 64 Minn. 2006
Zurich American Insurance Co. v. Bjelland 690 N.W.2d 352 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Zurich American Insurance Co. v. Bjelland 690 N.W.2d 352 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Hauschildt v. Beckingham 686 N.W.2d 829 Minn. 2004
Hauschildt v. Beckingham 686 N.W.2d 829 Minn. 2004
■ Fundamental to both doctrines “is that a ‘right, question or fact distinctly put in issue and directly determined by a court of competent jurisdiction * * * cannot be disputed in a subsequent suit between the same parties or their privies * * ” (quoting Montana v. United States, 440 U.S. 147, 153 , 99 S.Ct.
Long v. Creighton 670 N.W.2d 621 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Long v. Creighton 670 N.W.2d 621 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Conwed Corp. v. Union Carbide Chemicals & Plastics Co. 634 N.W.2d 401 Minn. 2001
Conwed Corp. v. Union Carbide Chemicals & Plastics Co. 634 N.W.2d 401 Minn. 2001
Reil v. Benjamin 584 N.W.2d 442 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Reil v. Benjamin 584 N.W.2d 442 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
ANALYSIS Reil claims that the district court erred in precluding him from bringing a separate action
Sayre v. McGOUGH CONST. CO., INC. 580 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Sayre v. McGOUGH CONST. CO., INC. 580 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
involved injured firefighters who brought an action against a third-party tortfeasor.
Minnesota Brewing Co. v. Egan & Sons Co. 574 N.W.2d 54 Minn. 1998
Minnesota Brewing Co. v. Egan & Sons Co. 574 N.W.2d 54 Minn. 1998
Thornton Bros. v. Reese, 188 Minn. 5, 8 , 246 N.W.
Himes v. Woodings-Verona Tool Works, Inc. 565 N.W.2d 469 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Himes v. Woodings-Verona Tool Works, Inc. 565 N.W.2d 469 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Collateral estoppel prevents relit-igation of a decided issue “in subsequent suits based on a different cause of action involving a party to the prior litigation.”
Sorenson v. Visser 558 N.W.2d 773 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Sorenson v. Visser 558 N.W.2d 773 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
(no common enterprise found where firefighters performed different functions and encountered greater risks than NSP personnel in fighting gas fire); cf. Ritter v. M.A.
O'MALLEY v. Ulland Bros. 549 N.W.2d 889 Minn. 1996
O'MALLEY v. Ulland Bros. 549 N.W.2d 889 Minn. 1996
McCourtie, 253 Minn. at 506 , d at 556
Bublitz v. Commissioner of Revenue 545 N.W.2d 382 Minn. 1996
Bublitz v. Commissioner of Revenue 545 N.W.2d 382 Minn. 1996
The doctrine of collateral estoppel provides that the determination of an issue by a prior court “is conclusive in subsequent suits based on a different cause of action involving a party to the prior litigation.”
Williams v. St. Paul Ramsey Medical Center, Inc. 530 N.W.2d 852 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Falgren v. STATE, BD. OF TEACHING 529 N.W.2d 382 Minn. Ct. App. 1995