Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Winters v. Kiffmeyer, 650 N.W.2d 167.

32 citing documents.

Minnesota Voters Alliance, et al., Petitioners, Republican Party of Minnesota, Petitioner, vs. Timothy Walz, in his ... Minn. 2025
Minnesota Voters Alliance, et al., Petitioners, Republican Party of Minnesota, Petitioner, vs. Timothy Walz, in his ... Minn. 2025
“Laches is an equitable doctrine applied to ‘prevent one who has not been diligent in asserting a known right from recovering at the expense of one who has been prejudiced by the delay.’ ” ().
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Laches is an equitable doctrine that seeks to “prevent one who has not been diligent in asserting a known right from recovering at the expense of one who has been prejudiced by the delay.” ().
Peter K Butler v. Shari Moore Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Peter K Butler v. Shari Moore Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“Laches is an equitable doctrine applied to ‘prevent one who has not been diligent in asserting a known right from recovering at the expense of one who has been prejudiced by the delay.’” ().
In the Matter of the Petition of: Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“Laches is an equitable doctrine applied to ‘prevent one who has not been diligent in asserting a known right from recovering at the expense of one who has been prejudiced by the delay.’” ().
In re the Marriage of: Robert H. Brandtjen, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Laches, in turn, “prevent[s] one who has not been diligent in asserting a known right from recovering at the expense of one who has been prejudiced by the delay.” (quotation omitted).
Original Jurisdiction Per Curiam Minn. 2020
’ ” (quoting Aronovitch v. Levy , d 570, 574 (Minn. 1953)) .
Trooien v. Simon 918 N.W.2d 560 Minn. 2018
Trooien v. Simon 918 N.W.2d 560 Minn. 2018
( quoting Winters v. Kiffmeyer , , 170 (Minn. 2002) ).
Kokosh v. $4657.00 U.S. Currency 898 N.W.2d 284 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Kokosh v. $4657.00 U.S. Currency 898 N.W.2d 284 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“Laches is an equitable doctrine applied to prevent one who has not been diligent in asserting a known right from recovering at the expense of one who has been prejudiced by the delay.” (quotation omitted).
Monaghen v. Simon 888 N.W.2d 324 Minn. 2016
Monaghen v. Simon 888 N.W.2d 324 Minn. 2016
Laches is an equitable doctrine applied to “ ‘prevent one who has not been diligent in asserting a known right from recovering at the expense of one who has been prejudiced by the delay.’” (quoting Aronovitch v. Levy, 238 Minn. 237, 242 , d *329 570, 574 (1953)).
State v. Hentges 844 N.W.2d 500 Minn. 2014
State v. Hentges 844 N.W.2d 500 Minn. 2014
Carlson v. Ritchie 830 N.W.2d 887 Minn. 2013
Carlson v. Ritchie 830 N.W.2d 887 Minn. 2013
Laches is an equitable doctrine that “prevent[s] one who has not been diligent in asserting a known right from recovering at the expense of one who has been prejudiced by the delay.” (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).
Martin v. Dicklich 823 N.W.2d 336 Minn. 2012
Martin v. Dicklich 823 N.W.2d 336 Minn. 2012
“Laches is an equitable doctrine applied to ‘prevent one who has not been diligent in asserting a known right from recovering at the expense of one who has been prejudiced by the delay.’” (quoting Aronovitch v. Levy, 238 Minn. 237, 242 , ).
Clark v. Reddick 791 N.W.2d 292 Minn. 2010
Clark v. Reddick 791 N.W.2d 292 Minn. 2010
Laches is an equitable doctrine which applies to “ ‘prevent one who has not been diligent in asserting a known right from recovering at the expense of one who has been prejudiced by the delay.’ ” (quoting Aronovitch v. Levy, 238 Minn. 237, 242 , ).
Hebert v. CITY OF FIFTY LAKES 784 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Hebert v. CITY OF FIFTY LAKES 784 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
“Laches is an equitable doctrine applied to prevent one who has not been diligent in asserting a known right from recovering at the expense of one who has been prejudiced by the delay.” (quotation omitted).
Clark v. Ritchie 787 N.W.2d 142 Minn. 2010
Clark v. Ritchie 787 N.W.2d 142 Minn. 2010
P. 120.01 (petition for writ of mandamus may be filed in supreme court only if directed to the court of appeals, the tax court, or the workers’ compensation court of appeals); , 168 & n. 1 (Minn.2002) (noting that this court had previously dismissed Winters' claim when initially brought as a petition for writ of mandamus in the supreme court, because the relief was sought against the secretary of state and original mandamus jurisdiction was therefore in the district court).
Clark v. Pawlenty 755 N.W.2d 293 Minn. 2008
Clark v. Pawlenty 755 N.W.2d 293 Minn. 2008
Laches is an equitable doctrine applied to “prevent one who has not been diligent in asserting a known right from recovering at the expense of one who has been prejudiced by the delay.”
Breza v. Kiffmeyer 723 N.W.2d 633 Minn. 2006
Breza v. Kiffmeyer 723 N.W.2d 633 Minn. 2006
(reiterating need for parties to file petitions promptly after learning of alleged error or omission in ballot preparation or election proceedings, because the very nature of election matters “routinely requires expeditious consideration and disposition by courts facing considerable time constraints i
Clayton v. Kiffmeyer 688 N.W.2d 117 Minn. 2004
Clayton v. Kiffmeyer 688 N.W.2d 117 Minn. 2004
Laches is an equitable doctrine applied to “prevent one who has not been diligent in asserting a known right from recovering at the expense of one who has been prejudiced by the delay.” (quoting Aronovitch v. Levy, 238 Minn. 237, 242 , ).