Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Uselman v. Uselman, 464 N.W.2d 130.

254 citing documents.

Kissoondath v. United States Fire Insurance Co. 620 N.W.2d 909 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Kissoondath v. United States Fire Insurance Co. 620 N.W.2d 909 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
“Entitlement to a new trial on the grounds of improper evi-dentiary rulings rests upon the complaining party’s ability to demonstrate prejudicial error.” (citation omitted).
Marriage of Haefele v. Haefele 621 N.W.2d 758 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Marriage of Haefele v. Haefele 621 N.W.2d 758 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
63.08; (holding a party must bring a motion demonstrating “prejudice or implied or actual bias” if the party failed to remove the judge before trial).
Brown v. State 617 N.W.2d 421 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Brown v. State 617 N.W.2d 421 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Minnesota Humane Society v. Minnesota Federated Humane Societies 611 N.W.2d 587 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Minnesota Humane Society v. Minnesota Federated Humane Societies 611 N.W.2d 587 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
3 (1998); -44 (Minn.1990) (“[t]o facilitate an orderly and uniform approach to the imposition of sanctions,” the supreme court established minimum procedural guidelines of “fair notice of both the possibility of a sanction and the reason for its proposed imposition * * * [and] an opportunity to respond to the notice of a po
Kellar v. Von Holtum 605 N.W.2d 696 Minn. 2000
Kellar v. Von Holtum 605 N.W.2d 696 Minn. 2000
In ordering sanctions, and referred to the need for a clear warning of potential sanctions.
State Ex Rel. Humphrey v. Philip Morris Inc. 606 N.W.2d 676 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
State Ex Rel. Humphrey v. Philip Morris Inc. 606 N.W.2d 676 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
(examining federal cases interpreting federal rule for assistance in interpreting similar state rule).
Leonard v. Northwest Airlines, Inc. 605 N.W.2d 425 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Leonard v. Northwest Airlines, Inc. 605 N.W.2d 425 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Peterson v. Hinz 605 N.W.2d 414 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Peterson v. Hinz 605 N.W.2d 414 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
-43 (Minn.1990) (stating an objective standard of reasonableness under the language now employed in Rule 11).
Conant v. Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi, L.L.P. 603 N.W.2d 143 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Conant v. Robins, Kaplan, Miller & Ciresi, L.L.P. 603 N.W.2d 143 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
H Window Co. v. Cascade Wood Products, Inc. 596 N.W.2d 271 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
H Window Co. v. Cascade Wood Products, Inc. 596 N.W.2d 271 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Whalen Ex Rel. Whalen v. Whalen 594 N.W.2d 277 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Whalen Ex Rel. Whalen v. Whalen 594 N.W.2d 277 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
State v. Patterson 587 N.W.2d 45 Minn. 1998
State v. Patterson 587 N.W.2d 45 Minn. 1998
Jennie-O Foods, Inc. v. Safe-Glo Products Corp. 582 N.W.2d 576 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Jennie-O Foods, Inc. v. Safe-Glo Products Corp. 582 N.W.2d 576 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Cole v. Star Tribune 581 N.W.2d 364 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Cole v. Star Tribune 581 N.W.2d 364 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Wagner v. MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS 581 N.W.2d 49 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Wagner v. MINNEAPOLIS PUBLIC SCHOOLS 581 N.W.2d 49 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
State v. Stevens 580 N.W.2d 75 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
State v. Stevens 580 N.W.2d 75 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Cloverdale Foods of Minnesota, Inc. v. Snacks 580 N.W.2d 46 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Cloverdale Foods of Minnesota, Inc. v. Snacks 580 N.W.2d 46 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Ottman v. Fadden 575 N.W.2d 593 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Ottman v. Fadden 575 N.W.2d 593 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
(holding error to award statutory sanctions where no evidence of bad faith and attorney did not assert frivolous claim or unfounded position for purposes of delay or harassment).
In Re Paternity of BJH 573 N.W.2d 99 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
A.J.S. v. M.T.H. 573 N.W.2d 99 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
In Re Paternity of BJH 573 N.W.2d 99 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
(admission of evidence); (granting discovery request), review denied (Minn. July 10, 1996).
A.J.S. v. M.T.H. 573 N.W.2d 99 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
(admission of evidence); (granting discovery request), review denied (Minn. July 10,1996).
Swanson v. Parkway Estates Townhouse Ass'n 567 N.W.2d 767 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Swanson v. Parkway Estates Townhouse Ass'n 567 N.W.2d 767 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
(abuse of discretion to award attorney fees for harassment when no evidence in record).
In Re the Welfare of D.J.N. 568 N.W.2d 170 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
In Re the Welfare of D.J.N. 568 N.W.2d 170 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Kroning v. State Farm Automobile Insurance Co. 567 N.W.2d 42 Minn. 1997
Kroning v. State Farm Automobile Insurance Co. 567 N.W.2d 42 Minn. 1997
The admission of “evidence rests within the broad discretion of the trial court and its ruling will not be disturbed unless it is based on an erroneous view of the law or *46 constitutes an abuse of discretion.”
Christensen v. Eggen 562 N.W.2d 806 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Christensen v. Eggen 562 N.W.2d 806 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
145 (Minn.1990) (applying abuse of discretion standard under both provisions).
Bigay v. Garvey 562 N.W.2d 695 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Bigay v. Garvey 562 N.W.2d 695 Minn. Ct. App. 1997

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by