Metro Building Companies v. RAM Buildings, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LARKIN, Judge.
Appellant claims that the district court erred by denying its motion for summary judgment, arguing that the district court erroneously concluded that a complaint may be amended to correct a corporate plaintiffs misstatement of its registered name. Appellant also claims that the district court abused its discretion by allowing such an amendment in this case and erred by relating the amendment back to the original pleading. Because we conclude that the misstatement of a corporate plaintiffs name in its pleading is a curable defect and that the amendment and relation back in…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Cooper v. FrenchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
- Fabio v. BellomoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
- McGowan v. Our Savior's Lutheran ChurchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
- Regie De L'Assurance Automobile Du Quebec v. JensenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
- Annandale Advocate v. City of AnnandaleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- 301 Clifton Place L.L.C. v. 301 Clifton Place Condominium Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010