Legal Opinion

Persigehl v. Ridgebrook Investments Ltd. Partnership

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided February 2, 2015No. Nos. A14-0027, A14-0123PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HUDSON, Judge.

In these consolidated appeals involving a certified question, a notice of related appeal (A14-0027), and a separate appeal (A14-0123), we consider whether Minn. Stat. § 504B.215 prohibits a landlord from billing tenants for fees in connection with a tenant’s utility bill; whether the statute imposes a requirement that those fees be equitable in comparison to the cost of the utility service itself; and whether the district court erred in dismissing an unjust-enrichment claim against the utility administrator who billed tenants for the fees. We conclude that the certified…

2Cases cited31 opinions

  1. Barnhart v. Peabody Coal Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2003
  2. Tuma v. Commissioner of Economic SecuritySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
  3. Bobich v. OjaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1960
  4. Caldas v. Affordable Granite & Stone, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
  5. Premier Bank v. BECKER DEVELOPMENT, LLCSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Timothy Hall, Jr. v. State of MinnesotaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2017
  2. Ashcel Companies, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation v. County of DodgeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2024
  3. Huff v. Canterbury Park Holding CorporationDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2023

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

Powered by the Exa API