Legal Opinion

Storms v. Schneider

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided August 8, 2011No. A10-1876PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

JOHNSON, Chief Judge.

Each of the two parties to this lawsuit seeks ownership of a particular statue of Our Lady of the Immaculate Conception. Storms commenced a replevin action to recover the statue from Schneider. The district court denied Schneider’s request for a jury trial, conducted a court trial, and decided the case in Storms’s favor. On appeal, Schneider argues only that she is entitled to a jury trial. We conclude that Schneider is so entitled and, therefore, reverse and remand for a new trial.

FACTS

We will recite the facts that are not in dispute and relevant to our resolution…

2Cases cited15 opinions

  1. Abraham v. County of HennepinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
  2. Indianhead Truck Line, Inc. v. Hvidsten Transport, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1964
  3. Olson v. Synergistic Technologies Business Systems, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
  4. Morton Brick & Tile Co. v. SodergrenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1915
  5. Seebold v. EustermannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Schmitz v. United States Steel Corp.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2013
  2. Michael Jones v. Tom RoyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011
  3. Blum v. ThompsonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2017

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API