Legal Opinion

Chin v. Zoet

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided January 26, 1988No. C2-87-1268PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FOLEY, Judge.

Appellants Frank Taiping Chin and Yen Yen Chin sued for rescission of their contract for deed with respondents Robert L. Zoet and Julie A. Zoet, and for return of all monies paid on the grounds the respondents failed to tender marketable title by the time prescribed in their contract for deed and that a reasonable time expired before respondents perfected title. 1 The trial court granted summary judgment for respondents and denied appellant’s motion to vacate the summary judgment and for amended findings of fact and conclusions of law or for a new trial. We reverse and…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Betlach v. Wayzata CondominiumSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
  2. Rathbun v. WT Grant CompanySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
  3. In Re Trust Under Will of HoldenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1940
  4. Zappa v. FaheySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
  5. Engstrom v. FARMERS & BANKERS LIFE INSURANCE CO.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1950

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

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Har-Ned Lumber Co. v. Amagineers, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1989
  2. Har-Ned Lumber Co. v. Amagineers, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1989
  3. In re the Marriage of: Helen Kernik v. James Kernik, Judith MurphyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API