Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 572.26 (2026)

[Repealed]

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

MS 2010 [Repealed, 2010 c 264 art 1 s 32]

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 39 cases, 1963–2011 · leading case: Kowler Assocs. v. Ross, 544 N.W.2d 800 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Kowler Assocs. v. Ross, 544 N.W.2d 800 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 12× “Appellant filed this appeal from the November 6, 1995, order.”

Arbitration Between Metro. Airports Comm'n v. Metro. Airports Police Fed'n, 443 N.W.2d 519 (Minn. 1989). · cites it 8× “Minn.Stat. § 572.26, subd. 1 (1988). The judgment MAC appealed from vacated the arbitrator's award but also ordered rehearing; therefore, it is not appealable pursuant to Minn.”

Freeman v. Duluth Clinic, Ltd., 334 N.W.2d 626 (Minn. 1983). · cites it 4× “An order compelling arbitration, however, is not appealable under Minn.Stat. § 572.26 (1982). [2] Because we reverse, the damages award is vacated.”

Myers v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 336 N.W.2d 288 (Minn. 1983). · cites it 2× “The trial court elected to leave for future determination the issue raised by State Farm whether the definition of “underinsured motor vehicle” in its policy precluded coverage for underin-sured motorist benefits.”

East Texas Salt Water Disposal Co. v. Werline, 307 S.W.3d 267 (Tex. 2010). “150C, § 16; Minn.Stat. § 572.26; Mo.Rev.Stat. § 435.440; Mont.”

Arbitration Between Minnesota Teamsters Pub. & Law Enf't Employees Union, Local No. 320 v. Cnty. of Carver, 571 N.W.2d 598 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 6× “On July 30, 1997, Carver County again sought review of the original order dated May 31, 1996, order by filing a direct appeal (C4-97-1371) and a petition for discretionary review (C6-97-1372).”

Schmidt v. Midwest Fam. Mut. Ins. Co., 426 N.W.2d 870 (Minn. 1988). · cites it 2× “, Minn.Stat. § 572.26, the act itself manifests the intent to expand, rather than constrict, the policy which had evolved of encouraging voluntary resolution of disputes between contracting parties.”

Safeco Ins. Co. v. Goldenberg, 435 N.W.2d 616 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 4× “Fay Jane Goldenberg appeals pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 572.26, subd. 1(3) (1988) from the trial court’s June 13, 1988 order denying confirmation of that part of the arbitrators’ award dealing with coverage and ordering a jury trial on the coverage issues.”

Michael-Curry Companies v. Knutson Shareholders Liquidating Trust, 434 N.W.2d 671 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 4× “Appeal arises from the trial court's order denying a motion to compel arbitration and staying arbitration pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 572.26, subd. 1(1) and (2) (1986).”

Stahl v. McGenty, 486 N.W.2d 157 (Minn. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 8× “Minn.Stat. § 572.26, subd. 1(1) (1990). Appellant, however, proceeded with discovery and a jury trial.”

Fedie v. Mid-Century Ins. Co., 631 N.W.2d 815 (Minn. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “The court found that “[bjecause this order effectively operates as a denial of arbitration, it is the functional equivalent of an order to compel arbitration and is appealable.”

Crosby-Ironton Fed'n of Teachers, Local 1325 v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 182, 285 N.W.2d 667 (Minn. 1979). · cites it 2× “” Minn.Stat. § 572.26, subd. 1(5) (1978). The appeal, having been made within 30 days, is timely.”

Show all 39 citing cases →

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.