Stern v. Dill

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that oral motions are permissible when “related to the matter then under consideration by the court”
• finding a Minnesota statute to be procedural for purposes of extending filing deadlines because “it does not change [plaintiffs] basic right to sue for negligence”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).