Legal Opinion
Majestic Inc. v. Berry
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided May 4, 1999No. C0-98-2138PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LANSING, Judge.
The district court denied a business debt- or’s motion to vacate a judgment under Minn. R. Civ. P. 60.02(d). We conclude that the judgment may have been defective, but it is not void. The district court did not err in denying the debtor’s motion to vacate, brought three and one-half years after the debtor knew that judgment had been entered. We affirm.
FACTS
This proeedurally complicated litigation involves a cognovit judgment entered after a default on a promissory note. The promissory note was part of a 1992 business transaction between Richard Berry and Majestic, Inc.,…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- D. H. Overmyer Co., Inc. of Ohio v. Frick Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1972
- Miller v. ShugartSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- V. T. A., Inc. v. Airco, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 1979
- Wittmer v. RuegemerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Commissioner of Natural Resources v. Nicollet County Public Water/Wetlands Hearings UnitCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
- Coast to Coast Demolition & Crushing, Inc. v. Real Equity Pursuit, LLCNevada Supreme Court · 2010
- Buck Blacktop, Inc. v. Gary Contracting and Trucking Company, LLCCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2019
- State v. CouillardCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2002
- Bowman Construction Company v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2021
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.