Legal Opinion
Anderson v. Crestliner, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided June 24, 1997No. C5-97-49PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KALITOWSKI, Judge.
Appellants Barton and Bonnie Anderson challenge the district court’s determination that their action against respondent Crestliner, Inc. was barred by the four-year statute of limitations under Minn.Stat. § 336.2-725 (1996).
FACTS
On April 24, 1989, the Andersons purchased a 21-foot Crestliner fiberglass power boat from respondent that came with a 1989 Crestliner warranty that states in relevant part:
Crestliner warrants to the first purchaser at retail that each new boat of Crestliner’s manufacture shall be free from any defect in material or workmanship according to…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Turner v. Alpha Phi Sorority HouseSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
- Wartnick v. Moss & BarnettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
- In Re Hennepin County 1986 Recycling Bond LitigationSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
- State Ex Rel. Beaulieu v. City of Mounds ViewSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
- Church of the Nativity of Our Lord v. WatPro, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Marvin Lumber & Cedar Co. v. PPG Industries, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2000
- Babcock & Wilcox Co. v. Cormetech, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2017
- Dennis Speerly v. General Motors, LLCCourt of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit · 2025
- Day Masonry v. Independent School District 347Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
- Joswick v. Chesapeake Mobile Homes, Inc.Court of Appeals of Maryland · 2001
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.