Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 5/6/2024
Robert Jensen v. Carl Rindelaub
Syllabus
Appellants challenge the district court's order of judgment following a remand and a new trial on the issue of the scope of their easement over respondents' property, asserting that the district court erred by exceeding the scope of relief when it prohibited use of the easement for storage, failing to interpret the easement as a whole, and admitting the testimony and exhibit of an expert witness. We affirm.
Cites
14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Kroning v. State Farm Automobile Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1997-07-31· cited 84×
- Rasmussen v. Two Harbors Fish Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota· 2013-05-22· cited 72×
- Roberge v. Cambridge Cooperative Creamery Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1954-11-26· cited 62×
- Quade v. Secura InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2012-06-12· cited 59×
- Minneapolis Athletic Club v. CohlerSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1970-05-29· cited 23×
- Michael Harlow v. State of Minnesota Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2016-08-10· cited 21×
- Farnes v. Freeman LaneSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1968-08-16· cited 20×
- Christie v. EstateSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2018-05-16· cited 16×
- Hoffman Motor Truck Co. v. EricksonSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1914-01-09· cited 13×
- Kretz v. Fireproof Storage Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1914-11-13· cited 11×
- Block v. SextonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota· 1998-05-19· cited 9×
- National City Bank v. EnglerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota· 2010-01-26· cited 8×
- Hopper v. RechCourt of Appeals of Minnesota· 1985-10-15· cited 7×
- In Re Marriage of May v. May Ex Rel. MayCourt of Appeals of Minnesota· 2006-05-16· cited 1×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.