Legal Opinion

Miller v. Anderson

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided October 14, 1986No. C8-86-583PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

CRIPPEN, Judge.

This appeal raises the question whether a lender is entitled to summary judgment on notes given for money lent for the renovation of residential property, where the lender has already cancelled the borrower’s contract for the purchase of the same property. The trial court entered judgment against appellants due to their default on two promissory notes. The court also allowed a mortgage foreclosure sale on a home and other real property given as security for the promissory notes. We affirm.

FACTS

In 1979, appellant Westwood Realty agreed to buy residential property from…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Grondahl v. BulluckSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  2. Albright v. HenrySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1970
  3. Schmidt v. McKenzieSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
  4. Ministers Life & Casualty Union v. Franklin Park Towers Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
  5. Fort Dodd Partnership v. TrooienCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Estate of Frantz v. PageCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1988
  2. Port Authority of St. Paul v. HarstadCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1995
  3. Quinlivan v. Emcasco Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
  4. Rudnitski v. SeelyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1989
  5. Schaefer v. Deppe (In re Deppe)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · 1997

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

Powered by the Exa API