Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Minnesota opinions name it 1 courts 2002–2024 1 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Doering v. Doeringgreen2 sentences2024Id. (establishing procedure on motion to reopen dissolution judgment for fraud under Minn. Stat. § 518.145 , subd. 2). 2016N.W.2d at 522-23 & n. 3 (noting similarities -between Minn.Stat. § 518.145, subd. 2, and rule 60.02 and, without discussion - of rule-60.02 factors, concluding that “circumstances meeting the requirements of Minnesota Statutes section 518.145, subd. 2 must be demonstrated in order to obtain relief from a judgment and decree of dissolution”); Kornberg, 542 N.W.2d at 386-88 (addressing arguments that dissolution judgment should be. set aside for mistake and fraud under Minn.Stat. ,§ 518.145, subd. 2, without mention of rule 60.02); Thompson, 739 N.W.2d at 428-29 (considering whether district cou | 3 | 6 |
Marriage of Haefele v. Haefelegreen2 sentences2016See Shirk, 561 N.W.2d at 522−23 & n.3 (noting similarities between Minn. Stat. § 518.145 , subd. 2, and rule 60.02 and, without discussion of rule- 60.02 factors, concluding that “circumstances meeting the requirements of Minnesota 6 Statutes section 518.145, subd. 2 must be demonstrated in order to obtain relief from a judgment and decree of dissolution”); Kornberg, 542 N.W.2d at 386–88 (addressing arguments that dissolution judgment should be set aside for mistake and fraud under Minn. Stat. § 518.145 , subd. 2, without mention of rule 60.02); Thompson, 739 N.W.2d at 428– 29 (considering whe 2016N.W.2d at 522-23 & n. 3 (noting similarities -between Minn.Stat. § 518.145, subd. 2, and rule 60.02 and, without discussion - of rule-60.02 factors, concluding that “circumstances meeting the requirements of Minnesota Statutes section 518.145, subd. 2 must be demonstrated in order to obtain relief from a judgment and decree of dissolution”); Kornberg, 542 N.W.2d at 386-88 (addressing arguments that dissolution judgment should be. set aside for mistake and fraud under Minn.Stat. ,§ 518.145, subd. 2, without mention of rule 60.02); Thompson, 739 N.W.2d at 428-29 (considering whether district cou | 1 | 2 |
Marriage of Hestekin v. Hestekingreen2 sentences2016See Shirk, 561 N.W.2d at 522−23 & n.3 (noting similarities between Minn. Stat. § 518.145 , subd. 2, and rule 60.02 and, without discussion of rule- 60.02 factors, concluding that “circumstances meeting the requirements of Minnesota 6 Statutes section 518.145, subd. 2 must be demonstrated in order to obtain relief from a judgment and decree of dissolution”); Kornberg, 542 N.W.2d at 386–88 (addressing arguments that dissolution judgment should be set aside for mistake and fraud under Minn. Stat. § 518.145 , subd. 2, without mention of rule 60.02); Thompson, 739 N.W.2d at 428– 29 (considering whe 2016N.W.2d at 522-23 & n. 3 (noting similarities -between Minn.Stat. § 518.145, subd. 2, and rule 60.02 and, without discussion - of rule-60.02 factors, concluding that “circumstances meeting the requirements of Minnesota Statutes section 518.145, subd. 2 must be demonstrated in order to obtain relief from a judgment and decree of dissolution”); Kornberg, 542 N.W.2d at 386-88 (addressing arguments that dissolution judgment should be. set aside for mistake and fraud under Minn.Stat. ,§ 518.145, subd. 2, without mention of rule 60.02); Thompson, 739 N.W.2d at 428-29 (considering whether district cou | 1 | 2 |
Marriage of Kornberg v. Kornberggreen2 sentences2016See Shirk, 561 N.W.2d at 522−23 & n.3 (noting similarities between Minn. Stat. § 518.145 , subd. 2, and rule 60.02 and, without discussion of rule- 60.02 factors, concluding that “circumstances meeting the requirements of Minnesota 6 Statutes section 518.145, subd. 2 must be demonstrated in order to obtain relief from a judgment and decree of dissolution”); Kornberg, 542 N.W.2d at 386–88 (addressing arguments that dissolution judgment should be set aside for mistake and fraud under Minn. Stat. § 518.145 , subd. 2, without mention of rule 60.02); Thompson, 739 N.W.2d at 428– 29 (considering whe 2016N.W.2d at 522-23 & n. 3 (noting similarities -between Minn.Stat. § 518.145, subd. 2, and rule 60.02 and, without discussion - of rule-60.02 factors, concluding that “circumstances meeting the requirements of Minnesota Statutes section 518.145, subd. 2 must be demonstrated in order to obtain relief from a judgment and decree of dissolution”); Kornberg, 542 N.W.2d at 386-88 (addressing arguments that dissolution judgment should be. set aside for mistake and fraud under Minn.Stat. ,§ 518.145, subd. 2, without mention of rule 60.02); Thompson, 739 N.W.2d at 428-29 (considering whether district cou | 1 | 2 |
Marriage of Krech v. Krechgreen2 sentences2016See Shirk, 561 N.W.2d at 522−23 & n.3 (noting similarities between Minn. Stat. § 518.145 , subd. 2, and rule 60.02 and, without discussion of rule- 60.02 factors, concluding that “circumstances meeting the requirements of Minnesota 6 Statutes section 518.145, subd. 2 must be demonstrated in order to obtain relief from a judgment and decree of dissolution”); Kornberg, 542 N.W.2d at 386–88 (addressing arguments that dissolution judgment should be set aside for mistake and fraud under Minn. Stat. § 518.145 , subd. 2, without mention of rule 60.02); Thompson, 739 N.W.2d at 428– 29 (considering whe 2016N.W.2d at 522-23 & n. 3 (noting similarities -between Minn.Stat. § 518.145, subd. 2, and rule 60.02 and, without discussion - of rule-60.02 factors, concluding that “circumstances meeting the requirements of Minnesota Statutes section 518.145, subd. 2 must be demonstrated in order to obtain relief from a judgment and decree of dissolution”); Kornberg, 542 N.W.2d at 386-88 (addressing arguments that dissolution judgment should be. set aside for mistake and fraud under Minn.Stat. ,§ 518.145, subd. 2, without mention of rule 60.02); Thompson, 739 N.W.2d at 428-29 (considering whether district cou | 1 | 2 |
Marriage of Thompson v. Thompsongreen2 sentences2016See Shirk, 561 N.W.2d at 522−23 & n.3 (noting similarities between Minn. Stat. § 518.145 , subd. 2, and rule 60.02 and, without discussion of rule- 60.02 factors, concluding that “circumstances meeting the requirements of Minnesota 6 Statutes section 518.145, subd. 2 must be demonstrated in order to obtain relief from a judgment and decree of dissolution”); Kornberg, 542 N.W.2d at 386–88 (addressing arguments that dissolution judgment should be set aside for mistake and fraud under Minn. Stat. § 518.145 , subd. 2, without mention of rule 60.02); Thompson, 739 N.W.2d at 428– 29 (considering whe 2016N.W.2d at 522-23 & n. 3 (noting similarities -between Minn.Stat. § 518.145, subd. 2, and rule 60.02 and, without discussion - of rule-60.02 factors, concluding that “circumstances meeting the requirements of Minnesota Statutes section 518.145, subd. 2 must be demonstrated in order to obtain relief from a judgment and decree of dissolution”); Kornberg, 542 N.W.2d at 386-88 (addressing arguments that dissolution judgment should be. set aside for mistake and fraud under Minn.Stat. ,§ 518.145, subd. 2, without mention of rule 60.02); Thompson, 739 N.W.2d at 428-29 (considering whether district cou | 1 | 2 |
Marriage of Shirk v. Shirkgreen1 sentence2016See Shirk, 561 N.W.2d at 522−23 & n.3 (noting similarities between Minn. Stat. § 518.145 , subd. 2, and rule 60.02 and, without discussion of rule- 60.02 factors, concluding that “circumstances meeting the requirements of Minnesota 6 Statutes section 518.145, subd. 2 must be demonstrated in order to obtain relief from a judgment and decree of dissolution”); Kornberg, 542 N.W.2d at 386–88 (addressing arguments that dissolution judgment should be set aside for mistake and fraud under Minn. Stat. § 518.145 , subd. 2, without mention of rule 60.02); Thompson, 739 N.W.2d at 428– 29 (considering whe | 1 | 1 |
Jlb v. Tebgreen1 sentence2002P. 60.02(c), if the party alleging fraud establishes by clear and convincing evidence that the “adverse party engaged in fraud or other misconduct which prevented it from fully and fairly presenting its case.” Regents of Univ. of Minn. v. Medical Inc., 405 N.W.2d 474, 480 (Minn.App.1987); see J.L.B., 474 N.W.2d at 603 ; cf. Doering v. Doering, 629 N.W.2d 124, 129-30 (Minn.App.2001) (stating that the standard for reopening dissolution judgment on the basis of fraud under Minn.Stat. § 518.145, subd. 2(3), within one year after the entry of judgment, is ordinary fraud not fraud on the court), rev | 1 | 1 |
Regents of University of Minnesota v. Medical Inc.green1 sentence2002P. 60.02(c), if the party alleging fraud establishes by clear and convincing evidence that the “adverse party engaged in fraud or other misconduct which prevented it from fully and fairly presenting its case.” Regents of Univ. of Minn. v. Medical Inc., 405 N.W.2d 474, 480 (Minn.App.1987); see J.L.B., 474 N.W.2d at 603 ; cf. Doering v. Doering, 629 N.W.2d 124, 129-30 (Minn.App.2001) (stating that the standard for reopening dissolution judgment on the basis of fraud under Minn.Stat. § 518.145, subd. 2(3), within one year after the entry of judgment, is ordinary fraud not fraud on the court), rev | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.