Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Frank v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co., 336 N.W.2d 307.

35 citing documents.

Oronoco Estates MHC Owner LLC, d/b/a Oakwood Meadows MHC, Appellant (A25-1751), Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Co., (explaining that if a district court is obligated and fails to make factual findings on an issue, a party must move for amended findings to preserve the issue for appeal).
Franke E Carpenter, III, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Co., (concluding “the marital relationship standing alone does not constitute one spouse the agent of the other,” absent “evidence that one spouse, expressly or impliedly, confers authority on the other to act on his or her behalf”); (“I
Todd Brian Kerber, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Luisa Petrona Branscum, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Children of: A. B. and C. J. W., Parents. Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Co. , (holding that if a district court fails to make required findings of fact, “the burden is on the parties to alert the court by a motion for amended finding[s]”); Anderson v. Peterson’s N. Branch Mill, Inc. , -19 (Minn. Ap p. 1993) (declining to review sufficiency of findings be
In re the Marriage of: Dia Eldin Jubara, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Co., (concluding that when a district court’s failure to address an issue is not raised in a new trial motion, there is no ruling for an appellate court to review).
In re the Matter of: Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Heideman v. Northwestern National Life Insurance Co. 546 N.W.2d 760 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Heideman v. Northwestern National Life Insurance Co. 546 N.W.2d 760 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
State v. Oanes 543 N.W.2d 658 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
State v. Oanes 543 N.W.2d 658 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Co., (noting, in a civil case, parties have the burden of bringing omitted issues to the attention of the trial court and holding the failure to do so by a motion for amended findings forfeits the right to appellate review of those issues); Anderson v. Peterson’s N. Branch Mill, Inc., -1
Bains v. Piper, Jaffray & Hopwood, Inc. 497 N.W.2d 263 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Bains v. Piper, Jaffray & Hopwood, Inc. 497 N.W.2d 263 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Beasley v. Medin 479 N.W.2d 95 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Beasley v. Medin 479 N.W.2d 95 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Pacific Mutual Door Co. v. James 465 N.W.2d 696 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Pacific Mutual Door Co. v. James 465 N.W.2d 696 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Love v. Amsler 441 N.W.2d 555 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Love v. Amsler 441 N.W.2d 555 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Hellerstedt v. Old Republic Insurance Co. 429 N.W.2d 677 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Hellerstedt v. Old Republic Insurance Co. 429 N.W.2d 677 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
The Minnesota Supreme Court considered this question in *679
Osterdyke v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 420 N.W.2d 900 Minn. 1988
Osterdyke v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 420 N.W.2d 900 Minn. 1988
Clark v. Allstate Insurance Co. 405 N.W.2d 463 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Clark v. Allstate Insurance Co. 405 N.W.2d 463 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Anderson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 397 N.W.2d 416 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Anderson v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 397 N.W.2d 416 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Quintana v. Allstate Insurance Co. 378 N.W.2d 40 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Quintana v. Allstate Insurance Co. 378 N.W.2d 40 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
208 , 612 P.2d 1285, 1288 (1980)
Security State Bank of Aitkin v. Morlock 355 N.W.2d 441 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Security State Bank of Aitkin v. Morlock 355 N.W.2d 441 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Drewes v. Levine 352 N.W.2d 456 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Drewes v. Levine 352 N.W.2d 456 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Maher v. All Nation Insurance Co. 340 N.W.2d 675 Minn. Ct. App. 1983
Maher v. All Nation Insurance Co. 340 N.W.2d 675 Minn. Ct. App. 1983