five factor test (Minnesota) · Go Syfert
← Minnesota issues

five factor test in Minnesota

9 Minnesota opinions name it 1 courts 1984–2016 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 (6)

CaseFollowedCited
Dent-Air, Inc. v. Beech Mountain Air Service, Inc.green
minn · 1983 · cited in 3 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 1985–1987
2 sentences

1987In Dent-Air, Inc. v. Beech Mountain Air Service, Inc., 332 N.W.2d 904 (Minn.1983), the supreme court adopted a five factor test to analyze jurisdictional requirements.

1985Dent-Air, Inc. v. Beech Mountain Air Service, Inc., 332 N.W.2d 904, 907 (Minn.1983).

23
Arthur H. Aftanase v. Economy Baler Company, a Corporationgreen
ca8 · 1965 · cited in 2 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 1984–1986
2 sentences

1986To determine jurisdiction over non-resident defendants, Minnesota follows the five factor test developed in Aftanase v. Economy Baler Co., 343 F.2d 187, 197 (8th Cir.1965): An analysis of minimum contacts requires consideration of (1) the quantity of contacts, (2) the nature and quality of contacts, (3) the source and connection of those contacts to the cause of action, (4) the interest of the forum state, and (5) the convenience of the parties.

1984Minnesota follows the five factor test developed in Aftanase v. Economy Baler Co., 343 F.2d 187, 197 (8th Cir.1965): An analysis of minimum contacts requires consideration of (1) the quantity of contacts, (2) the nature and quality of contacts, (3) the source and connection of those contacts to the cause of action, (4) the interest of the forum state, and (5) the convenience of the parties.

22
State v. Flowersgreen
minn · 2007 · cited in 1 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016
1 sentence

2016See State v. Flowers, 734 N.W.2d 239, 253 (Minn. 2007) (enumerating the five factor test for determining whether police have exceeded the permissible scope of a Terry stop) (citing United States v. Raino, 980 F.2d 1148, 1149-50 (8th Cir. 1992)).

11
United States v. Terry Lewis Rainogreen
ca8 · 1992 · cited in 1 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016
1 sentence

2016See State v. Flowers, 734 N.W.2d 239, 253 (Minn. 2007) (enumerating the five factor test for determining whether police have exceeded the permissible scope of a Terry stop) (citing United States v. Raino, 980 F.2d 1148, 1149-50 (8th Cir. 1992)).

11
Davis v. Furlonggreen
minn · 1983 · cited in 1 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 1987–1987
1 sentence

1987Davis v. Furlong, 328 N.W.2d 150, 152 (Minn.1983).

11
Rostad v. On-Deck, Inc.green
minn · 1985 · cited in 1 Minnesota opinions naming this issue, 1986–1986
1 sentence

1986Rostad, 372 N.W.2d at 719-20 (citations omitted).

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
Moore Associates, LLC v. Commissioner of Economic Security green
minnctapp · 1996
1 sentence

2015Id.

12015–2015
Milkovich v. Saari green
minn · 1973
1 sentence

1987Minnesota has adopted a five factor analysis for conflict of substantive law matters: (а) predictability of results; (b) maintenance of interstate and international order; (c) simplification of the judicial task: (d) advancement of the forum’s governmental interests; and (e) application of the better rule of law. [Milkovich ], 295 Minn, at 161, 203 N.W.2d at 412 .

11987–1987

Statutes the citing opinions construe

MN § Minn. Stat. § 543.19 (6)

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.

Where else courts name it

WA 26 (2007–2017) LA 16 (1984–2018) MN 9 (1984–2016) PA 5 (1985–2025) IN 4 (1996–2012) WV 4 (1981–2017) TN 4 (1999–2018) WY 3 (1988–1999) ID 3 (1994–2001) SC 3 (2010–2024) HI 3 (2019–2026) IL 3 (1998–2020) WI 2 (1980–1986) MD 2 (1977–2018) OK 2 (1988–2006) AR 2 (2025–2026) ND 2 (2007–2007) FL 2 (1998–1998) IA 2 (1994–2016) CT 2 (2003–2009) TX 2 (2006–2010)

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