Legal Opinion
Nguyen v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided February 13, 1997No. C2-95-2305PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KEITH, Chief Justice.
This case presents the question of whether a judgment entered pursuant to the mandatory, nonbinding arbitration provisions of Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 114.09 may be vacated for excusable neglect under Minn. R. Civ. P. 60.02. Appellant State Farm challenges the district court’s determination, affirmed by the court of appeals, that a judgment entered under Minn. Gen. R. Prae. 114.09 may not be vacated under Minn. R. Civ. P. 60.02. Nguyen v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 546 N.W.2d 37, 40 (Minn.App.1996).
We reverse.
On February 13, 1991, respondent To Van Nguyen was…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Finden v. KlaasSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1964
- House v. HansonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
- Duenow v. LindemanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1947
- Charson v. Temple IsraelSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Lund v. Pan American MacHines SalesCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- In Re the Welfare of J.R.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
- Ferdinand Leo Gams, Jr., Respondent/Cross-Appellant v. Steven Ronald Houghton, Appellant/Cross-Respondent.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2016
- In Re the Welfare of the Children of CoatsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
- Roehrdanz v. BrillSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
- Szarzynski v. SzarzynskiCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2007
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.