Legal Opinion
Galante v. Oz, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided January 21, 1986No. C3-85-643PublishedCited by 15 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HUSPENI, Judge.
Appellants Carol Galante and Concord Group, Inc. appeal from the trial court’s denial of amended findings or, in the alternative, a new trial. The trial court ruled that appellants were entitled to recover the $35,000 paid to respondent, Virgil Doerfler, as a down payment towards purchase of the Oz nightclub. Doerfler was allowed a $30,000 setoff against this amount for an unpaid personal loan he made to Joe Ga-lante. The trial court also found that Doer-fler had not been unjustly enriched and denied Galante recovery on a quasi-contract claim. We affirm.
FACTS
In early…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- First National Bank of St. Paul v. RamierSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
- Cady v. BushSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1969
- Peterson v. JohnstonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Anderson v. DeLisleCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
- Kundiger v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by15 opinions
- Ventura v. Titan Sports, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1995
- Jesse Ventura v. Taya KyleCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2016
- Khoday v. Symantec Corp.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2012
- Holmes v. TorgusonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1994
- In Re R. Bastyr and Associates, Inc.United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · 1988
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.