Legal Opinion

Ferdinand Leo Gams, Jr., Respondent/Cross-Appellant v. Steven Ronald Houghton, Appellant/Cross-Respondent.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided August 31, 2016No. A14-1747PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

GILDEA, Chief Justice.

In this ease, we are asked to decide whether Minn. R. Civ. P. 60.02 applies to a Minn. R. Civ. P. 5.04(a) “deemed” dismissal, and whether such a dismissal violates procedural due process. The district court concluded that Rule 60.02 is inapplicable to a dismissal under Rule 5.04(a) or, alternatively, that respondent Ferdinand .Leo Gams, Jr. failed to establish all four requirements for relief under Rule 60.02, see Finden v. Klaas, 268 Minn. 268, 128 N.W.2d 748 (1964). The court' of appeals reversed and remanded for reconsideration, rejecting the district court’s…

2Cases cited30 opinions

  1. Mathews v. EldridgeSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
  2. Link v. Wabash RailroadSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  3. Logan v. Zimmerman Brush Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1982
  4. Texaco, Inc. v. ShortSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
  5. Atkins v. ParkerSupreme Court of the United States · 1985

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

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. In re Welfare of the Child of R.K.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2017
  2. Olson v. One 1999 Lexus Mn License Plate No. 851ldv Vin: Jt6hf10u6x0079461Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2019
  3. Jerry Wayne Cole v. Alexander Allen WutzkeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2016
  4. Buck Blacktop, Inc. v. Gary Contracting and Trucking Company, LLCCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2019
  5. Christensen Law Office, PLLC v. OleanCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2018

16 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