Him test (Minnesota) · Go Syfert
← Minnesota issues

Him test in Minnesota

5 Minnesota opinions name it 1 courts 1989–2015 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by Minnesota courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (4)

CaseFollowedCited
Finden v. Klaasgreen
minn · 1964 · cited in 2 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 2008–2015
2 sentences

2015P. 60.02 by applying a four-factor test that was established in Hinz..." Northland Temporaries, Inc. v. Turpin, 744 N.W.2d 398, 402 (Minn.App.2008) review denied (Minn. Apr. 29, 2008); see also Finden v. Klaas, 268 Minn. 268, 271 , 128 N.W.2d 748, 750 (1964) (reaffirming the Him test).

2015P. 60.02 by applying a four-factor test that was established in Hinz..." Northland Temporaries, Inc. v. Turpin, 744 N.W.2d 398, 402 (Minn.App.2008) review denied (Minn. Apr. 29, 2008); see also Finden v. Klaas, 268 Minn. 268, 271 , 128 N.W.2d 748, 750 (1964) (reaffirming the Him test).

12
Northland Temporaries, Inc. v. Turpingreen
minnctapp · 2008 · cited in 2 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 2008–2015
2 sentences

2015P. 60.02 by applying a four-factor test that was established in Hinz..." Northland Temporaries, Inc. v. Turpin, 744 N.W.2d 398, 402 (Minn.App.2008) review denied (Minn. Apr. 29, 2008); see also Finden v. Klaas, 268 Minn. 268, 271 , 128 N.W.2d 748, 750 (1964) (reaffirming the Him test).

2015P. 60.02 by applying a four-factor test that was established in Hinz..." Northland Temporaries, Inc. v. Turpin, 744 N.W.2d 398, 402 (Minn.App.2008) review denied (Minn. Apr. 29, 2008); see also Finden v. Klaas, 268 Minn. 268, 271 , 128 N.W.2d 748, 750 (1964) (reaffirming the Him test).

12
Charson v. Temple Israelgreen
minn · 1988 · cited in 2 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 1989–2008
2 sentences

2008The supreme court concluded that Char-son had satisfied three of the Him factors and then stated that “before relief will be granted from a final order or judgment, the moving party must also establish to the satisfaction of the court that it possesses a meritorious claim.” Id. at 491 .

2008The supreme court concluded that Char-son had satisfied three of the Him factors and then stated that “before relief will be granted from a final order or judgment, the moving party must also establish to the satisfaction of the court that it possesses a meritorious claim.” Id. at 491 .

12
Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co.green
minn · 1952 · cited in 1 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 1989–1989
2 sentences

1989Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co., 237 Minn. 28, 30 , 53 N.W.2d 454, 456 (1952); see also Charson v. Temple Israel, 419 N.W.2d 488, 491 (Minn.1988) (applying Him test).

1989Hinz v. Northland Milk & Ice Cream Co., 237 Minn. 28, 30 , 53 N.W.2d 454, 456 (1952); see also Charson v. Temple Israel, 419 N.W.2d 488, 491 (Minn.1988) (applying Him test).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
Hengel v. Hyatt green
minn · 1977
2 sentences

2008As authority for this point, the Charson court relied on Hengel , 312 Minn, at 319, 252 N.W.2d at 106 .

2008As authority for this point, the Charson court relied on Hengel , 312 Minn, at 319, 252 N.W.2d at 106 .

12008–2008
Howard v. Frondell green
minnctapp · 1986
2 sentences

1990Although the right to relief from a judgment is not absolute, Howard, 387 N.W.2d at 207 , it is not necessary that all four Him factors be satisfied equally.

1990Although the right to relief from a judgment is not absolute, Howard, 387 N.W.2d at 207 , it is not necessary that all four Him factors be satisfied equally.

11990–1990

Where else courts name it

MN 5 (1989–2015) CA 3 (2013–2025)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check