DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite In Re Probate Court, Hennepin County, 198 N.W.2d 260.

80 citing documents.

  • Gieseke ex rel. Diversified Water Diversion, Inc. v. IDCA, Inc. 826 N.W.2d 816 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
    advise the court” and an advisory jury’s findings do not “supplant” a district court’s findings but “merely reinforce the court’s own decision on the disputed fact.” Onvoy, Inc. v. ALLETE, Inc., (quotation omitted); see In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , 94, , 260 (1972) (“[F]indings made by a court sitting without a jury, or with an advisory jury, shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous.”); Noble v. C.E.D.O., Inc., (“When the court empanels an advisory jury, it must make its own fi
  • In Re Estate of Torgersen 711 N.W.2d 545 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
    A finding is clearly erroneous if this court “is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , 96, , 261 (1972) (quotation omitted).
  • Marriage of Gully v. Gully 599 N.W.2d 814 Minn. 1999
    P. 52.01 ("Findings of fact * * * shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and due regard shall be given to the opportunity of the trial court to judge the credibility of the witnesses.”); In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94, 96 , (stating that the standard of review under Minn. R. Civ.
  • In Re the Estate of Opsahl 448 N.W.2d 96 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
    In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , 96, , 261 (1972).
  • Marriage of Knutson v. Zenk 413 N.W.2d 593 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    Findings are clearly erroneous where the appellate court is left with the “‘definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.’” E.g., In Re Balafas v. Angelos, 293 Minn. 94, 96 , (quoting United States v. Oregon State Medical Society, 343 U.S. 326, 339 , 72 S.Ct.
  • Demning v. Grain Dealers Mutual Insurance 411 N.W.2d 571 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    Donaldson v. Kohner, 264 Minn. 230, 233 , see also In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , (reviewing court must give due regard to trial court’s opportunity to judge witness credibility).
  • Park Hill Apartments v. Anderson 409 N.W.2d 924 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    See also In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , (reviewing court must give due regard to trial court’s opportunity to judge witnesses credibility).
  • Palmer v. Production Credit Ass'n 404 N.W.2d 293 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    (quoting In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94, 96 , ).
  • In Re the Estate of Anderson 384 N.W.2d 518 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    Findings are “clearly erroneous” only if “the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” , 266 n. 7 (Minn.1981) (quoting In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , 96, , 261 (1972).
  • Harry N. Ray, Ltd. v. Nascene 379 N.W.2d 249 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    See In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94
  • Matter of Estate of Anderson 379 N.W.2d 197 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    A trial court’s finding will be deemed clearly erroneous only if “the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , 96, , 261 (1972) (quoting United States v. Oregon State Medical Society, 343 U.S. 326, 339 , 72 S.Ct.
  • Emery Air Freight Corp. v. Local 544, International Brotherhood of Teamsters 379 N.W.2d 539 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , 96, , 261 (1972).
  • Johnson v. Commissioner of Public Safety 375 N.W.2d 99 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    In Re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94, 96
  • In Re Conservatorship of Mansur 367 N.W.2d 550 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • In Re Conservatorship of Mansur 367 N.W.2d 550 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    Id,., In re Probate Court, Hennepin County, 293 Minn. 94
  • Bio-Line, Inc. v. Wilfley 366 N.W.2d 662 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    Fletcher v. Sellner, 311 Minn. 524 , In re Trust Known as Great Northern Iron Ore Properties, 308 Minn. 221 , In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94
  • Matter of Estate of Moulton 365 N.W.2d 335 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    * * * Indeed, the scope of review under this rule may now be regarded as the broadest exercised by an appellate court for, even though there is evidence to support a finding, the finding can be held to be clearly erroneous if “the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , 96, , 261 (1972), quoting United States v. Oregon State Medical Society, 343 U.S. 326, 339 , 72 S.Ct.
  • Toombs v. Daniels 361 N.W.2d 801 Minn. 1985
    Hence, we will apply the “clearly erroneous” standard of review to the factual findings below which will only be held to be clearly erroneous if we are “left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94, 96
  • Matter of Estate of Olsen 357 N.W.2d 407 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    52.01; In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , 96, , 261 (1972).
  • Matter of Estate of Langlie 355 N.W.2d 732 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    In Re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94
  • T.P.B. Properties v. Coldwell, Banker & Co. 354 N.W.2d 102 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    A finding is clearly erroneous if— * ⅜ * ‘the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.’ In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , 96, , 261 (1972) (quoting United States v. Oregon State Medical Soc., 343 U.S. 326, 339 , 72 S.Ct.
  • Dufrane v. Commissioner of Public Safety 353 N.W.2d 705 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    Northern States Power Co. v. Lyon Food Products, Inc., 304 Minn. 196, 201 , (citing In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , ).
  • Matter of Estate of Boysen 309 N.W.2d 45 Minn. 1981
    52.01, In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94, 96
  • Matter of Estate of Congdon 309 N.W.2d 261 Minn. 1981
    This court has stated that a trial court’s findings are “clearly erroneous” only if “the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94, 96
  • City of Minnetonka v. Carlson 298 N.W.2d 763 Minn. 1980
    541 (1979); In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94, 96
  • G.G.C. Co. v. First National Bank of St. Paul 287 N.W.2d 378 Minn. 1979
    Rule 52.01, Rules of Civil Procedure; In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94
  • Cherne Industrial, Inc. v. Grounds & Associates, Inc. 278 N.W.2d 81 Minn. 1979
    Greer v. Kooiker, 312 Minn. 499 , In re Trust Known as Great Northern Iron Ore Properties, 308 Minn. 221 , In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94
  • Asp v. O'BRIEN 277 N.W.2d 382 Minn. 1979
    In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , 96, , 261 (1972).
  • Roy Matson Truck Lines, Inc. v. Michelin Tire Corp. 277 N.W.2d 361 Minn. 1979
    In re Trust Known as Great Iron Ore Properties, 308 Minn. 221, 225 , In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , 96, , 261 (1972).
  • Hanka v. Pogatchnik 276 N.W.2d 633 Minn. 1979
    See, In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , 96, , 261 (1972).
  • Vernon J. Rockler & Co. v. Glickman, Isenberg, Lurie & Co. 273 N.W.2d 647 Minn. 1978
    In re Trust known as Great Northern Iron Ore Properties, 308 Minn. 221, 225 , In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , 96, , 261 (1972).
  • Matter of Welfare of Sharp 268 N.W.2d 424 Minn. 1978
    See, also, In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94
  • Southview Country Club v. City of Inver Grove Heights, Dakota County 263 N.W.2d 385 Minn. 1978
    We hold that affirmance of the assessments based on the “special benefits” thus determined was clearly erroneous under the standard set by Rule 52.01, Rules of Civil Procedure, and In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94
  • Gollner v. Champagne 260 N.W.2d 567 Minn. 1977
    Rule 52.01, Rules of Civil Procedure for Municipal Courts, provides in part: “Findings of fact shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and due regard shall be given to the opportunity of the trial court to judge the credibility of the witnesses.” This is the usual standard of review in the type of case before us. In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94, 96
  • Fidelity Bank & Trust Co. v. Fitzimons 261 N.W.2d 586 Minn. 1977
    A finding is clearly erroneous if— “* * * <⅛6 reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.’ ” In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , 96, , 261 (1972).
  • State Ex Rel. Spannaus v. Mecca Enterprises, Inc. 262 N.W.2d 152 Minn. 1977
    See, Rule 52.01, Rules of Civil Procedure; In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94, 96
  • ICC Leasing Corp. v. Midwestern MacHinery Co. 257 N.W.2d 551 Minn. 1977
    Rule 52.01, Rules of Civil Procedure; In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94
  • Minnesota Public Interest Research Group v. White Bear Rod & Gun Club 257 N.W.2d 762 Minn. 1977
    In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94
  • Reserve Mining Co. v. Herbst 256 N.W.2d 808 Minn. 1977
    15.0425 as relevant to the scope of review by the district court, but stated that our standard of review was whether the findings, conclusions, and order of the district court were “clearly erroneous,” citing In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94
  • Greer v. Kooiker 253 N.W.2d 133 Minn. 1977
    In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94, 96 , In re Trust Known as Great Northern Iron Ore Properties, 308 Minn. 221 , Bengtson v. Village of Marine on St.
  • State Ex Rel. Spannaus v. Coin Wholesalers, Inc. 250 N.W.2d 583 Minn. 1976
    See, Rule 52.01, Rules of Civil Procedure; In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94, 96 , In re Trust known As Great Northern Iron Ore Properties, 308 Minn. 221, 225 , , certiorari denied sub nom.
  • Real Estate Taxes of Northerly Centre Corp. v. County of Ramsey 248 N.W.2d 923 Minn. 1976
    In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94
  • Elliott v. Mitchell 249 N.W.2d 172 Minn. 1976
    Rule 52.01, Rules of Civil Procedure; In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94
  • Fletcher v. Sellner 247 N.W.2d 422 Minn. 1976
    In re Trust Known as Great Northern Ore Properties, 308 Minn. 221 , In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94, 96
  • Pettibone Minnesota Corp. v. Castle 247 N.W.2d 52 Minn. 1976
    In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94
  • Bengtson v. Village of Marine on St. Croix 246 N.W.2d 582 Minn. 1976
    In re Trust Known as Great Northern Iron Ore Properties, 308 Minn. 221 , In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94, 96
  • State v. Stephenson 245 N.W.2d 621 Minn. 1976
    In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94
  • Thomsen v. Independent School District No. 91 244 N.W.2d 282 Minn. 1976
    In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94
  • In Re Welfare of Wachlin 245 N.W.2d 183 Minn. 1976
    In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94
  • Utica Mutual Insurance v. Emmco Insurance 243 N.W.2d 134 Minn. 1976
    In re Estate of Balafas, 293 Minn. 94 , Rule 52.01, Rules of Civil Procedure.