| MINNEAPOLIS PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEY |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
UNPUBLISHED CIVIL OPINIONS FROM THE MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALSA07-1164In re the Marriage of: Ewa Gabriella Banas, petitioner, Appellant, vs. Antony Jo'sef Banas, Respondent. SCHELLHAS, Judge On appeal, pro se appellant challenges three district court rulings. The first terminated appellant's permanent spousal maintenance award, the second denied her motions for reconsideration and to vacate, and the third awarded costs and disbursements to respondent. We reverse and remand the rulings terminating maintenance and awarding costs and disbursements because both are unsupported by findings. In light of our reversal, we dismiss as moot the portion of the appeal taken from the denial of appellant's motion to vacate. We also deny as moot appellant's motion to expedite release of this opinion. = = = = A07-1880 Michael James Brouillette, Appellant, vs. Jennifer Lee Lund, Respondent. ROSS, Judge This appeal concerns a dispute between a former boyfriend and girlfriend over ownership of a 2001 Chevrolet Monte Carlo that was once a gift between them. Michael Brouillette filed suit in conciliation court to recover ,500 or the Chevy from Jennifer Lund. Brouillette claims that Lund wrongly assumed ownership by having his name removed from the title. The conciliation court entered judgment for Lund. Brouillette appealed to the district court seeking a jury trial, but the district court granted Lund summary judgment. Brouillette argues on appeal that Lund's summary judgment motion was untimely, that the district court demonstrated bias by engaging in ex parte communication with Lund, and that disputed material facts existed. Because disputed material facts preclude summary judgment, we reverse. = = = = A07-2002 A07-2174 Adam K. Riess, Respondent (A07-2002), Appellant (A07-2174), vs. Kyle A. Davis, Appellant (A07-2002), Respondent (A07-2174), Michelle M. Nelson, Defendant (A07-2002), Respondent (A07-2174). MINGE, Judge This appeal arises from a civil action in which the jury awarded compensatory damages and punitive damages to appellant/respondent Adam Riess, a party injured in a motor vehicle accident caused by exceptionally egregious conduct by appellant/respondent Kyle Davis, the driver of the other vehicle. Following the jury trial, Davis moved for a new trial on punitive damages, or in the alternative, remittitur. The district court denied the motion for a new trial but granted a conditional remittitur. We affirm. = = = = A07-2429 Matthew Sobocinski, Respondent, vs. 2001 Honda VIN #JHMCG56421C004713, ND License HKT747, Appellant. PETERSON, Judge In this appeal from a judgment ordering that the vehicle in a vehicle-forfeiture case be returned to the owners, appellant argues that respondent's father knew or should have known that respondent would use the vehicle in a manner contrary to law and failed to take reasonable steps to prevent the unlawful use. We affirm. = = = = A08-0010 In the Matter of the Application of Ozhaawaskoo Giishig for a Change of Name. HUDSON, Judge Appellant Ozhaawaskoo Giishig challenges the denial of his application to change his name. Because the district court's finding of fact are insufficient to support the denial, we remand for further proceedings. = = = = A08-0273 Vernice Wessman, et al., Appellants, vs. City of Mankato, Respondent. LARKIN, Judge Appellants claim that the district court erred as a matter of law when it denied appellants' motion for summary judgment and issued a sua sponte injunctive order, which both parties challenge on appeal. The district court's orders were based on its determination that the State Building Code does not preempt Mankato, Minn., City Code § 12.03. We conclude that Mankato, Minn., City Code § 12.03 is preempted by the State Building Code and therefore reverse. = = = = A08-1077 In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Sean Patrick Brinkman SCHELLHAS, Judge On appeal from his civil commitment, appellant argues that (1) the district court lacked clear and convincing evidence to support his civil commitment and (2) his rights to due process and effective assistance of counsel were denied. We affirm. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| By visiting this page or clicking the "submit" button above, you agree that you have read and accept this "disclaimer". |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright ©
Michael E. Douglas, Attorney at Law, Saint Paul MN. All Rights
Reserved. Minnesota Law Firm representing Personal Injury, Car / Auto Accident, Workers Compensation, Medical Malpractice, Social Security Disability claims. Dedicated to Injured Workers, Victims of Negligence, Car Accidents, Victims of Fraud, and those in need of legal assistance. |
