Legal Opinion
Roemhildt v. Kristall Development, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided May 3, 2011No. A10-1846PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
STONEBURNER, Judge.
Appellant bank, owner of real estate subject to a mortgage, challenges the district court’s ruling that the bank cannot enforce a partial-release provision contained in the note secured by the mortgage.
FACTS
In 2004, respondents James and Barbara Roemhildt (Roemhildts) sold a large parcel of land to defendant Kristall Development, Inc. (KDI), which platted the parcel into approximately 40 lots. Roemhildts financed a portion of the purchase price, accepting at closing KDI’s note for $360,000, due on May 12, 2006, and secured with a contemporaneously executed mortgage.…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Marso v. Mankato Clinic, Ltd.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1967
- Vawter v. CraftsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1889
- Winne v. LahartSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1923
- Farrell v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1989
- Business Bank v. HansonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2009
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Holkesvig v. GroveNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2014
- Embree v. U.S. Bank National Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2013
- Anita W. Sluck v. Terence E. RapaczCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2016
- Bernstein v. Cengage Learning, Inc.District Court, S.D. New York · 2020
- Christopher C. Mogren v. Gregory JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2016
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.