Cass County, Respondent, vs. Rhonda Aho, Appellant
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Appellant challenges the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of respondent, arguing that the district court lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because respondent failed to join an indispensable party. Appellant also asserts various constitutional challenges. We affirm.
1Opinion of the Court
This opinion is nonprecedential except as provided by Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 136.01, subd. 1(c). STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A25-0492 Cass County, Respondent, vs. Rhonda Aho, Appellant. Filed October 13, 2025 Affirmed Segal, Judge * Cass County District Court File No. 11-CV-24-1083 Jason J. Kuboushek, Emma M. Baker, Iverson Reuvers, Bloomington, Minnesota (for respondent) Rhonda Aho, Pine River, Minnesota (pro se appellant) Considered and decided by Schmidt, Presiding Judge; Connolly, Judge; and Segal, Judge. NONPRECEDENTIAL OPINION SEGAL, Judge Appellant challenges the district…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Camara v. Municipal Court of City and County of San FranciscoSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Penn Central Transportation Co. v. New York CitySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- DLH, Inc. v. RussSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- Underdahl v. Commissioner of Public SafetySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.