Legal Opinion

Hoff v. Kempton

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided March 26, 1982No. 81-298PublishedCited by 206 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SIMONETT, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order denying defendant Kempton’s motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction pursuant to Rush v. Savchuk, 444 U.S. 320, 100 S.Ct. 571, 62 L.Ed.2d 516 (1980). Upon request of defendant, the district court thereafter certified as “important and doubtful” pursuant to Minn.R.Civ.App.P. 103.03(i) the question of whether Rush v. Savchuk should be retroactively applied. We answer this question in the affirmative and reverse the order of the district court with instructions to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction.

This action arises out of an automobile…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. International Shoe Co. v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
  2. Shaffer v. HeitnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
  3. Chevron Oil Co. v. HusonSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
  4. Firestone Tire & Rubber Co. v. RisjordSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  5. Rush v. SavchukSupreme Court of the United States · 1980

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by206 opinions

  1. McDonnell v. Commissioner of Public SafetySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1991
  2. State v. BairdSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
  3. Tereault v. PalmerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
  4. Marriage of Holmberg v. HolmbergSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
  5. Application of MinnegascoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997

201 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API