Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Minneapolis Community Development Agency v. Smallwood, 379 N.W.2d 554.

31 citing documents.

GEP XI Maple Grove LLC, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Central Towers Limited Partnership, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Central Towers argues that the district court should not have found relevant the eradication of Schiffman’s bedbugs because , under this court’s rev. denied (Minn. Feb.
Fairmont Housing and Redevelopment Authority, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Timberland Partners, Inc., Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Agency v. Smallwood , review denied (Minn. Feb.
Red River Apartments, LLC, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
review denied (Minn. Feb.
Brian Darr, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
review denied (Minn. Feb.
Doran 610 Apartments, LLC, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Agency v. Smallwood , review denied (Minn. Feb.
Rolling Meadows Cooperative, Inc. v. Macatee 904 N.W.2d 920 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Rolling Meadows Cooperative, Inc. v. Macatee 904 N.W.2d 920 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(“Our standard of review is whether the [district] court’s findings of fact are clearly erroneous.”), review denied (Minn. Feb.
Nuvola, LLC v. Morgan Wright Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Nuvola, LLC v. Morgan Wright Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. Feb.
Andrew Ellis v. Danielle Thompson, Abdul R. Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Andrew Ellis v. Danielle Thompson, Abdul R. Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
review denied (Minn. Feb.
Blackowiak v. Mielke 692 N.W.2d 897 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Blackowiak v. Mielke 692 N.W.2d 897 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
review denied (Minn. Feb.
Cimarron Village v. Washington 659 N.W.2d 811 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Cimarron Village v. Washington 659 N.W.2d 811 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
review denied (Minn. Feb.
Minneapolis Public Housing Authority v. Lor 578 N.W.2d 8 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Minneapolis Public Housing Authority v. Lor 578 N.W.2d 8 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
review denied (Minn. Feb.
Phillips Neighborhood Housing Trust v. Brown 564 N.W.2d 573 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Phillips Neighborhood Housing Trust v. Brown 564 N.W.2d 573 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Federal Land Bank of Saint Paul v. Obermoller 429 N.W.2d 251 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Federal Land Bank of Saint Paul v. Obermoller 429 N.W.2d 251 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
“Unlawful detainer is a civil proceeding, and the only issue for determination is whether the facts alleged in the complaint are true.” pet.
Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Waconia v. Chandler 403 N.W.2d 708 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Waconia v. Chandler 403 N.W.2d 708 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
that the “decision of the hearing official * * * is contrary to applicable Federal, State or local law * * As additional support, pet.
Mac-Du Properties v. LaBresh 392 N.W.2d 315 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Mac-Du Properties v. LaBresh 392 N.W.2d 315 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
§ 566.15 (1984); see also Minneapoli s pet.
Thomey v. Stewart 391 N.W.2d 533 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Thomey v. Stewart 391 N.W.2d 533 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
“Unlawful detainer is a civil proceeding, and the only issue for determination is whether the facts alleged in the complaint are true.” pet.
Schuett Investment Co. v. Anderson 386 N.W.2d 249 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Schuett Investment Co. v. Anderson 386 N.W.2d 249 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
ANALYSIS An unlawful detainer proceeding is civil in nature, and “the only issue for determination is whether the facts alleged in the complaint are true.” pet.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by