Legal Opinion

Anderson v. DeLisle

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided August 7, 1984No. CO-83-2040PublishedCited by 32 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FOLEY, Judge.

Vendee sought to recover under a theory of unjust enrichment for improvements made to the vendor’s property before cancellation of the parties’ contract for deed. The trial judge granted judgment notwithstanding the verdict for the vendors, finding that he committed an error of law by submitting the issue of unjust enrichment to the jury in the absence of any evidence of mistake or fraud by the vendor. The vendee appeals. We reverse and reinstate the jury award as modified.

FACTS

The parties stipulated to the trial court’s findings of fact for purposes of this appeal. The…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Cady v. BushSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1969
  2. Klass v. Twin City Federal Savings and Loan Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1971
  3. Georgopolis v. GeorgeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1952
  4. Lawrence Zirinsky v. James L. Sheehan, John D. Sheehan and Brooklyn Center Industrial Park, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1969

3Cited by32 opinions

  1. Harvell v. Goodyear Tire and Rubber Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 2007
  2. Ventura v. Titan Sports, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1995
  3. Southtown Plumbing, Inc. v. Har-Ned Lumber Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992
  4. Schumacher v. SchumacherCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
  5. Holman v. CPT CORP.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1990

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

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

Powered by the Exa API