Legal Opinion
Rouse Mechanical, Inc. v. Dahl
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided September 1, 1992No. C1-92-1468PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SPECIAL TERM OPINION
WOZNIAK, Chief Judge.
FACTS
Rouse Mechanical, a Hennepin County corporation, brought a malpractice suit in Ramsey County. Rouse alleges that petitioner Merlin Dahl, a Hennepin County lawyer, failed to perfect a mechanics’ lien on property located in Ramsey County and owned by the St. Paul Port Authority. The trial court denied Dahl’s motion to change venue to Hennepin County, ruling that a portion of the claim arose in Ramsey County. Dahl seeks a writ of mandamus.
DECISION
Mandamus is the proper remedy to review a venue decision. Castle v. Village of Baudette, 267 Minn. 140,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Har-Ned Lumber Co. v. Amagineers, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1989
- Castle v. Village of BaudetteSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1963
- Ebenezer Society v. Minnesota State Board of HealthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
- FARMERS & MER. STATE BANK OF LAMBERTON v. EbbesenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
3Cited by4 opinions
- Eischen Cabinet Co. v. HildebrandtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
- Rolinski v. LewisDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 2003
- McGuire v. FitzsimmonsWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1996
- Eischen Cabinet Co. v. HildebrandtCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2003