Legal Opinion
Hill v. Okay Const. Co., Inc.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided March 18, 1977No. 46374, 46414PublishedCited by 109 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Sheran, Chief Justice.
This is an appeal by defendant E. E. Ranta from a judgment entered against him in district court and from an order denying his motion for amended findings of fact, conclusions of law, and order for judgment or in the alternative for a new trial. Defend ant Okay Construction Company, Inc. (Okay), also seeks review pursuant to Rule 106, Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure.
Stated generally, the problems considered in the lower court were (a) the nature of a business relationship’ between plaintiffs, Roger and Judith Hill, and Okay; (b) the liability for the operating debts…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Hendrickson v. Minnesota Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1960
- Christy v. SalitermanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1970
- Hendrickson v. Minnesota Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1960
- Elsie McDonnell Guardian of the Estate of Ronald McDonnell and Elsie McDonnell Individually v. Jeanette TimmermanCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1959
- Hestbeck v. Hennepin CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1973
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by109 opinions
- Wagenmann v. AdamsCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1987
- SCSC Corp. v. Allied Mutual Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
- Wartnick v. Moss & BarnettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
- O'NEIL v. BerganDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals · 1982
- Lentino v. Fringe Employee Plans, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1979
104 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.