Minnesota Statutes
Minn. Stat. § 303.13 (2026)
Service Of Process
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 102
cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1944–2024 · leading case: Atkins v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 104 N.W.2d 888 (Minn. 1960).
Atkins v. Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., 104 N.W.2d 888 (Minn. 1960). “Section 303.13, subd. 1 (3), provides that: “If a foreign corporation makes a contract with a resident of Minnesota to be performed in whole or in part by either party in Minnesota, or if such foreign corporation commits a tort in whole or in part in Minnesota against a resident…”
Gavle v. Little Six, Inc., 555 N.W.2d 284 (Minn. 1996). “LSI's application to do business in Minnesota provides that the corporation irrevocably consents to service of process, as provided by Minn.Stat. § 303.13 (1994), and was signed by Allene Ross, vice-chair of LSI.”
Hunt v. Nevada State Bank, 172 N.W.2d 292 (Minn. 1969). “The two Pioneer companies were served by Hunt under § 303.13, and Pioneer Casualty was also served under § 60A.”
Beck v. Spindler, 99 N.W.2d 670 (Minn. 1959). “Section 303.13, subd. 1, as far as here material, reads: “A foreign corporation shall be subject to service of process, as follows: “(3) If a foreign corporation makes a contract with a resident of Minnesota to be performed in whole or in part by either party in Minnesota, or if…”
McQuay, Inc. v. Samuel Schlosberg, Inc., 321 F. Supp. 902 (D. Minnesota 1971). “Plaintiff, a Minnesota based manufacturing corporation, in bringing this diversity action has attempted to effect service of process upon the defendant, a New York corporation, under the Minnesota long-arm statutes, Minn.Stat. §§ 303.13 Subd. 1(3) and 543.19 Subd.”
Dotterweich v. Yamaha Int'l Corp., 416 F. Supp. 542 (D. Minnesota 1976). “The issue before the court is whether this court may exercise in personam jurisdiction over the Japanese corporations pursuant to the Minnesota “single act” long-arm statute, Minn.Stat. § 303.13 Subd. 1(3). The record presently before the court indicates that plaintiff purchased…”
Fourth Nw. Nat'l Bank v. Hilson Indus., Inc., 117 N.W.2d 732 (Minn. 1962). “This action was commenced by service of the summons and complaint upon the secretary of the State of Minnesota pursuant to § 303.13, subd. 1(3), which provides in part as follows: *113 “If a foreign corporation makes a contract with a resident of Minnesota to be performed in…”
Rykoff-Sexton, Inc. v. Am. Appraisal Assocs., Inc., 469 N.W.2d 88 (Minn. 1991). “Minn.Stat. § 303.13 (1990); see also Minn.”
Medtronic, Inc. v. Mine Saf. Appliances Co., 468 F. Supp. 1132 (D. Minnesota 1979). “In the instant case, service of process has been made pursuant to both Minn.Stat. § 303.13, subd. 1(3), and Minn.”
Longines-Wittnauer Watch Co. v. Barnes & Reinecke, Inc., 209 N.E.2d 68 (NY 1965). “[1]) or contracts “to be performed in whole or in part by either party in [this State] ” (Minn. Stat. Ann., § 303.13, subd. 1, par.”
Ewing v. Lockheed Aircraft Corp., 202 F. Supp. 216 (D. Minnesota 1962). “§ 303.13, subd. 1(3), and by personal service on Lockheed’s field representative residing within this State.”
Kreisler Mfg. Corp. v. Homstad Goldsmith, Inc., 322 N.W.2d 567 (Minn. 1982). “7 We have previously distinguished between sellers and buyers, noting that jurisdiction under Minn.Stat. § 303.13 (1980) was proper in cases in which: [T]he nonresident defendant had been the aggressor * * * and had had substantial contact with the forum, invoking its protection…”
— Minn. Stat. § 303.13(1)(3) — 1 case
I. S. Joseph Co., Inc. v. Mannesmann Pipe & Steel Corp., 408 F. Supp. 1023 (D. Minnesota 1976).
— Minn. Stat. § 303.13(2) — 1 case
Rykoff-Sexton, Inc. v. Am. Appraisal Assocs., Inc., 460 N.W.2d 78 (Minn. Ct. App. 1990).
— Minn. Stat. § 303.13(3) — 3 cases
Munsingwear, Inc. v. Damon Coats, Inc., 449 F. Supp. 532 (D. Minnesota 1978).
Mueller v. Steelcase, Inc., 172 F. Supp. 416 (D. Minnesota 1959).
Scranton Grain Co. v. Lubbock Mach. & Supply Co., 167 N.W.2d 748 (N.D. 1969).
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.