Legal Opinion
Smith v. Spitzenberger
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided February 26, 1985No. C0-84-1688PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
POPOVICH, Chief Judge.
Respondents obtained a temporary injunction restraining the cancellation of a contract for deed. Appellants claim the trial court did not have the authority to issue the preliminary injunction because respondents had not commenced an action before obtaining the injunction. We affirm.
FACTS
Appellants sold a house to respondents on August 25, 1980. The purchase price was $75,600.00. Respondents paid $11,-900.00 in cash, assumed a mortgage of $50,622.58, and entered into a contract for deed of $18,077.42 for the remaining balance. The contract for deed had a balloon…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Cramond v. AFL-CIOSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1964
- Ryan v. Hennepin CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1947
- D.J. Enterprises of Garrison, Inc. v. Blue Viking, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
3Cited by9 opinions
- Fraser v. FraserCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2002
- Sitek v. StrikerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2009
- Jennifer L. DeCook, Respondents/Cross-Appellants v. Olmsted Medical Center, Inc., Brenda J. Hanson, R.N., and Darlene M. Pratt, R.N., Appellants/Cross-Respondents, Kenneth M. Palmer, M.D., Jack F. Perrone, M.D., Kimberly McKeon, M.D., and Ashley Morrow, R.N.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2016
- Southerlin v. Automotive Electronics Corp.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1988
- Allstate Insurance Co. v. AllenCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.