Legal Opinion
Stahl v. McGenty
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided June 2, 1992No. C5-91-1933PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SCHUMACHER, Judge.
Appellant James McGenty alleges that the trial court erred in denying his motion *158to compel arbitration, that such order is presently reviewable, and that the judgment following the jury verdict should be set aside and arbitration ordered. Appellant also alleges the trial court improperly calculated the damages based on the jury’s special verdict. We affirm.
FACTS
Appellant employed respondents in his business. Respondents expressed an interest in buying the company but did not have sufficient cash available. They informed appellant that they would purchase the company…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Thayer v. American Financial Advisers, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- Atcas v. Credit Clearing Corporation of AmericaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1972
- Grover-Dimond Associates, Inc. v. American Arbitration Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1973
- Michael-Curry Companies v. Knutson Shareholders Liquidating TrustSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- Henvit v. KellerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Mitchell v. OwensCourt of Appeals of Tennessee · 2005
- Robert J. Denley Co., Inc. v. Neal Smith Construction Company, Inc.Court of Appeals of Tennessee · 2007
- Stahl v. McGentyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992