Preferred Financial Corp. v. Quality Homes, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HUSPENI, Judge.
This appeal arises from the trial court’s denial of appellant’s motion for a new trial. Appellant contends that it was an error of law not to submit the matter to arbitration upon post-trial motion. We affirm.
FACTS
In 1984 respondent, Quality Homes, Inc., purchased a computer system from the predecessor of Pinetree Business Systems, Inc. (Pinetree) under a lease arrangement with Preferred Financial Corp. (Preferred) for the purposes of financing. Respondent experienced problems with the system after delivery. A substitute system also performed inadequately and respondent…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Layne-Minnesota Co. v. Regents of the University of MinnesotaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1963
- Carl H. Neuman, Plaintiff-Appellee-Cross-Appellant v. Otis G. Pike, Defendant-Appellant-Cross-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1979
- Brothers Jurewicz, Inc. v. Atari, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- Kempf v. KempfSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1970
- County of Hennepin v. Ada-Bec SystemsCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Fort Snelling State Park Ass'n v. Minneapolis Park & Recreation BoardCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2003
- Koes v. Advanced Design, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
- Brodsky v. BrodskyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2007
- Hughes v. LundCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999
- Fedie v. Mid-Century Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001