Edina Development Corporation v. Hurrle
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HALBROOKS, Judge.
On appeal from summary judgment, appellant argues that the district court erred in holding that it did not have the right to exercise its option under an option agreement because appellant did not fulfill all of the conditions of a separate agreement to purchase 162 acres of land. Because we conclude that the district court did not err, we affirm.
FACTS
Respondents Larry Hurrle, Carol Hurrle, and Timothy Hurrle are family farmers. They own and rent farmland in Sherburne, Stearns, and Wright counties where they conduct business under the name Hurrle Farms. Hurrle Farms is…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Fabio v. BellomoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
- DLH, Inc. v. RussSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- Brookfield Trade Center, Inc. v. County of RamseySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
- Art Goebel, Inc. v. North Suburban Agencies, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.