Legal Opinion
Hoang Minh Ly v. Nystrom
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided January 25, 2000No. C6-99-565PublishedCited by 7 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
AMUNDSON, Judge.
Appellant challenges the district court’s finding that respondent did not violate the Consumer Fraud Act, while the respondent challenges the court’s finding of common law fraud. We affirm.
FACTS
Hoang Ly purchased a restaurant from Kim Nystrom in June of 1996. Ly and his wife made the purchase based on Nys-trom’s representations about gross monthly revenues and profits. Ly does not read or write English, but Nystrom both reads and writes English. Nystrom prepared and presented the lease agreement and promissory note that Ly signed to purchase the restaurant. No…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Frost-Benco Electric Ass'n v. Minnesota Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
- State Ex Rel. Humphrey v. Alpine Air Products, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
- Gjovik v. StropeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
- State Ex Rel. Humphrey v. Alpine Air Products, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- Hoang Minh Ly v. NystromSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2000
- Marvin Lumber & Cedar Co. v. PPG Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2000
- Marvin Lumber and Cedar Company Marvin Windows of Tennessee, Inc. v. Ppg Industries, Inc., Third Party v. Elf Atochem North America, Inc., Third Party Minnesota, Amicus on Behalf OfCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2000
- Marvin Lumber & Cedar Co. v. PPG Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2000
- Hoang Minh Ly v. NystromSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2000
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.