Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Hebrink v. Farm Bureau Life Insurance Co., 664 N.W.2d 414.

25 citing documents.

Doris Evanson, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Co., (holding that a district court did not abuse its discretion by treating a “motion in limine” that “functioned as a motion for summary judgment” as a motion for summary judgment).
Hybrid Light Solutions, LLC, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Mecc Alte relies on this court’s to support its argument.
Janet C. Dreyer, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Estate of: Stephen D. King, Decedent. Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Co, we held that a district court has the authority to grant summary judgment sua sponte when (1) “no genuine issues of material fact remain,” (2) “one of the parties deserves judgment as a matter of law, ” and (3) “the absence of a formal motion creates no prejudice to the party against whom summary judgment is granted .”
Kelly Bell, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Co., (concluding that the district court erred in its sua sponte grant of summary judgment because “no evidence in the record .
Peggy R. Ek, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
1648 Properties, LLC, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Co. , -20 (Minn. App. 2003).
Community Housing Services - Park Towers, Inc., Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Co., -19 (Minn. App. 2003).
A19-0006 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Co., d 414, 418-20 (Minn. App. 2003).
In re the Estate of: Alex Batinich, Deceased. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Heather Fitzgerald, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Hammes West, LLC v. Dorothy Lyons Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Hammes West, LLC v. Dorothy Lyons Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Ernest Malisheske, Great West Casualty Company, Intervenor v. Kevin Kortan Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Ernest Malisheske, Great West Casualty Company, Intervenor v. Kevin Kortan Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In the Matter of the Petition of Prime Security Bank For a New Certificate of Title After Mortgage … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In the Matter of the Petition of Prime Security Bank For a New Certificate of Title After Mortgage … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Co., for the proposition that “[p]rejudice is unavoidable when a trial court denies any opportunity to marshal evidence in opposition to a basis for summary judgment raised sua sponte.” (quotation omitted).
Randy L. Brandt v. Wayne E. Lee Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Randy L. Brandt v. Wayne E. Lee Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Co., –19 (Minn. App. 2003) (holding that a motion in limine may be treated as a motion for summary judgment if it results in the dismissal or barring of a claim).
Fieseler Masonry, Inc. v. City of Mabel, Exact Construction Company, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Fieseler Masonry, Inc. v. City of Mabel, Exact Construction Company, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Co., see Del Hayes & Sons, Inc. v. Mitchell, 304 Minn. 275, 281, (affirming a district court’s grant of summary judgment sua sponte).
Sterling State Bank v. Maas Commercial Properties, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Sterling State Bank v. Maas Commercial Properties, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Co., (“A party opposing a district court’s sua sponte order for summary judgment must be given a ‘meaningful opportunity’ to acquire evidence to oppose the motion.”).
Williams v. BOARD OF REGENTS OF UNIV. 763 N.W.2d 646 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Williams v. BOARD OF REGENTS OF UNIV. 763 N.W.2d 646 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Co., (quoting Restatement (Second) of Torts § 552(1) (1977)).