Legal Opinion

Juster Steel v. Carlson Companies

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided April 23, 1985No. C1-84-2056PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SEDGWICK, Judge.

The trial court dismissed Count I of appellant’s complaint as barred by the statute of limitations, Counts II and IV on grounds of insufficient particularity in the pleading, or alternatively failure to state a claim, and granted summary judgment on Count III. We affirm.

FACTS

Appellant Juster Steel and respondent Carlson entered into a purchase agreement for property in Hennepin County on February 20, 1976. As a condition to the agreément, Carlson agreed to undertake necessary excavation and landfill to accommodate the construction of a building along the southern…

2Cases cited19 opinions

  1. Betlach v. Wayzata CondominiumSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
  2. Wild v. RarigSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
  3. Grondahl v. BulluckSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  4. Davis v. Re-Trac Manufacturing CorporationSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1967
  5. Northern States Power Co. v. FranklinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1963

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

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Riley v. Cordis Corp.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2009
  2. Cox v. Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2012
  3. TROOIEN v. MansourCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2010
  4. Schumacher v. SchumacherCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
  5. Stead-Bowers v. LangleyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001

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

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

Powered by the Exa API