Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 82. REAL ESTATE BROKERS AND SALESPERSONS
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 82.33 (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[Repealed]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 2002 [Renumbered 82.18]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases, 1976–2009 · leading case: Poser v. Abel, 510 N.W.2d 224 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Poser v. Abel, 510 N.W.2d 224 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 20× “On appeal from a judgment for respondent, Ronald Poser, appellants Robert Abel and Peter Bugbee claim the trial court erred in finding Poser was entitled to a commission on the sale of their building when the writing describing the commission arrangement did not comply with the…”
Rosenberg v. Heritage Renovations, LLC, 685 N.W.2d 320 (Minn. 2004). · cites it 5× “" Minn.Stat. § 82.33, subds. 1 & 2 (2002). Rosenberg argues that he was duly licensed and the July Agreement satisfied the requirement for a writing.”
Krogness v. Best Buy Co., Inc., 524 N.W.2d 282 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 16× “Best Buy also argued that the existence of the express listing agreement and the written agreement requirement in Minn. Stat. § 82.33 , subd. 2 (Supp.1993) barred recovery under an unjust enrichment or implied contract theory.”
R.M. Parranto Co. v. Bernick, 354 N.W.2d 600 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 14× “The trial court found that the parties never executed a formal listing agreement but that the April 14, 1981 letter of intent, the Holm/plaintiff listing agreement, and the parties’ oral agreement formed a sufficient written listing agreement to satisfy Minn.Stat. § 82.33 subd.…”
Atkinson v. Prudential Prop. Co., 43 F.3d 367 (8th Cir. 1994). · cites it 10× “The district court held that under Minn.Stat. § 82.33, subd. 2, all claims by brokers seeking payment arising out of a real estate transaction must be supported by a suitable written agreement.”
Dellwood Enter. v. Pac. Am. Real Est. Fund, 505 F. Supp. 187 (D. Minnesota 1981). · cites it 13× “On March 28, 1980, the motion was denied because there appeared to be factual uncertainties regarding plaintiff’s status under Minn.Stat. § 82.33. Those factual issues have now been resolved.”
Lynn Beechler Realty Co. v. Warnygora, 396 N.W.2d 717 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 82.33, subd. 2 (1982). See also Minnesota Rules 2800.”
Norwest Bank Minnesota, Nat'l Ass'n v. Sween Corp., 916 F. Supp. 1494 (D. Minnesota 1996). · cites it 6× “Minn.Stat. § 82.33 subd. 1. As discussed above, the parties agree that neither Nor-west nor its Corporate Finance Division employees involved in this matter were licensed pursuant to chapter 82.”
Raddatz v. Northland Dev. Co. of Minneapolis, 352 N.W.2d 474 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 6× “1(c) Finally Northland contends that Raddatz is not entitled to a commission because the schedule is unenforceable under Minn.Stat. § 82.33 (1978). The statute provides: Subd.”
Teachout v. Wilson, 376 N.W.2d 460 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 3× “” Minn.Stat. § 82.33, subd. 2 (1980). Wilson and Hunerberg executed a written listing agreement on July 1, 1981.”
Cri, Inc. v. Frederick O. Watson, Northland Inv. Co., Cri, Inc. v. Frederick O. Watson v. Northland Inv. Co., 608 F.2d 1137 (8th Cir. 1979). “Minn.Stat. § 82.33(1) provides in part: No person shall bring or maintain any action in the courts of this state for the collection of compensation for the performance of any of the acts for which a license is required under this chapter without alleging and proving that he was…”
Douglas v. Schuette, 607 N.W.2d 142 (Minn. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 82.33, subd. 1 (1998). “This section is penal in nature and will defeat a claim for commissions if a plaintiff fails to allege and prove that [he or she was] duly licensed.”
Show all 18 citing cases →
— Minn. Stat. § 82.33(1) — 1 case
Cri, Inc. v. Frederick O. Watson, Northland Inv. Co., Cri, Inc. v. Frederick O. Watson v. Northland Inv. Co., 608 F.2d 1137 (8th Cir. 1979). “Minn.Stat. § 82.33(1) provides in part: No person shall bring or maintain any action in the courts of this state for the collection of compensation for the performance of any of the acts for which a license is required under this chapter without alleging and proving that he was…”
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.