Legal Opinion
Crince v. Kulzer
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided March 30, 1993No. C1-92-1258PublishedCited by 9 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SCHUMACHER, Judge.
Appellants Harold and Joann Crince and Kelly and Janette Lewis brought an action against respondents Darwin and Marcia Kulzer for specific performance of a real estate purchase agreement, and against Richard and Elizabeth Reese for damages incurred when the Reeses signed a purchase agreement with the Kulzers for the same property. The Kulzers moved for summary judgment and for costs and disbursements.
The trial court granted summary judgment in favor of the Kulzers and Reeses, but denied the Kulzers’ request for costs and disbursements. The Crinces and Lew-ises…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Offerdahl v. University of Minnesota Hospitals & ClinicsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Cederstrand v. Lutheran BrotherhoodSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1962
- Jostens, Inc. v. National Computer System, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- Lake Company v. MolanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1964
- Lewis v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1913
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by9 opinions
- Geraets v. HalterSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1999
- Powell v. MVE Holdings, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
- Quade & Sons Refrigeration, Inc. v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1994
- Barry v. BarryCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1999
- Health & Welfare Plan for Employees of REM, Inc. v. RidlerDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1996
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.