Any judgment obtained in a court of record by means of perjury, subornation of perjury, or any fraudulent act, practice, or representation of the prevailing party, may be set aside in an action brought for that purpose by the aggrieved party in the same judicial district within three years after the discovery by the aggrieved party of such perjury or fraud. In such action the court may either enjoin the enforcement of the judgment or command the satisfaction thereof, may compel the party procuring the same to restore any property received by virtue thereof, and may make such other or further order or judgment as justice shall require; but no right or interest of a third party acquired under such judgment in good faith, and without knowledge of the wrong complained of, shall be affected by the action herein provided for; provided, if during the pendency of such action the enforcement of such judgment or an action thereon shall become barred by the statute of limitations, and such judgment is sustained, the same may be enforced, or an action commenced thereon, within one year after such action is finally determined.
Notes of Decisions
Marriage of Clay v. Clay, 397 N.W.2d 571 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 76× “02(6), and Minn.Stat. § 548.14? 3. Is appellant entitled to seek indemnity or contribution from respondent Gerald Augustin? 4.”
Marriage of Carlson v. Carlson, 371 N.W.2d 591 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 18× “Wife first argues that her motion to revoke the stipulation and vacate the judgment and decree was before the family court pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 548.14 (1980). Minn.Stat. § 548.”
Cochrane v. Tudor Oaks Condo. Proj., 529 N.W.2d 429 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995).
· cites it 6× “02 or any other Minnesota Rule of Civil Procedure, to consider matters brought under Minn.Stat. § 548.14 (1992) and to consider any of the legal or equitable theories raised in a case.”
Marriage of Mahoney v. Mahoney, 474 N.W.2d 232 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991).
· cites it 12× “The court may, however, set the judgment aside in an independent action for fraud upon the court.”
Bloomquist v. Thomas, 9 N.W.2d 337 (Minn. 1943).
· cites it 8× “1941, § 548.14 (Mason St. 1927, § 9405)? (2) What are the equities of the parties under the foregoing-statute as related to the facts here presented? A considerable portion of appellant’s brief is devoted to a.”
Ramsey Cnty. v. Suggs, 653 N.W.2d 458 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 6× “02 and Minn. Stat. §§ 548.14 , 518.145 (2000). The county opposed appellant’s motion, arguing that appellant had failed to provide adequate reasons to vacate the paternity adjudication.”
Hanson v. Woolston, 701 N.W.2d 257 (Minn. Ct. App. 2005).
· cites it 4× “Hanson and Lori Kuhl therefore satisfy the constitutional and prudential limitations on standing. Procedural Standing Woolston argues that Hanson and Lori Kuhl lack procedural standing to challenge the judgment under Minn.”
Matter of Est. of Weber, 418 N.W.2d 497 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988).
· cites it 10× “Appellants claim respondents’ actions justify vacation of the orders for fraud pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 548.14 (1986). We must reject this approach also, for substantially the same reasons we deemed the relief of Minn.”
Marriage of Angelos v. Angelos, 367 N.W.2d 518 (Minn. 1985).
· cites it 2× “2; see also Minn.Stat. § 548.14 (1984) (dealing with the setting aside of judgments).”
Tankar Gas, Inc. v. Lumbermen's Mut. Cas. Co., 9 N.W.2d 754 (Minn. 1943).
· cites it 5× “1941, § 548.14 (Mason St. 1927, § 9405), Tankar alleges that Lumbermen’s was able to effect its exoneration of liability by fraudulent acts and representations both as to Tankar and this court, under the following circumstances, to-wit: That as Tankar’s insurer it undertook the…”
Carl v. Detoffol, 25 N.W.2d 479 (Minn. 1946).
· cites it 2× “Where a judgment is set aside for perjury, subornation of perjury, or fraud under § 548.14, 9 the same rule is applied. Geisberg v.”
Am. Sharecom, Inc. v. LDB Int'l Corp., 553 N.W.2d 433 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996).
· cites it 2× “We note that Minn.Stat. § 548.14 (1994) allows a party to bring an independent action to set aside any judgment procured by fraud.”
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.