Legal Opinion

Beutz v. A.O. Smith Harvestore Products, Inc.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 4, 1988No. CX-87-1132, C1-87-1245 and C3-87-1246PublishedCited by 31 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

WAHL, Justice.. These consolidated cases by plaintiff farmers against the manufacturers and sellers of agricultural equipment raise the question whether a federal court’s dismissal of plaintiffs’ claims under the Racketeering Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) operates as a res judicata bar to litigation of plaintiffs’ state law claims in state court. Trial courts of two state judicial districts found state law claims so barred. The Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed. We affirm that result.

I

Plaintiffs Harvey and John Beutz and Daniel Fairchild purchased Harvestore silos designed…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Hauser v. MealeySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1978
  2. Fed. Sec. L. Rep. P 98,209 Arthur L. Stokes v. Lawrence Lokken and Henson & Tully, a PartnershipCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1981
  3. Youngstown Mines Corp. v. ProutSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1963
  4. Louis JOHNSON, Appellant, v. BOYD-RICHARDSON CO., AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1981
  5. McMenomy v. RydenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1967

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

3Cited by31 opinions

  1. Lavera Granetha Ashanti v. City of Golden ValleyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2012
  2. Pierson Sand and Gravel, Inc. v. Keeler Brass Co.Michigan Supreme Court · 1999
  3. Laase v. County of IsantiCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2011
  4. Myers Through Myers v. PriceCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1990
  5. Rucker v. SchmidtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011

26 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