Kuske v. Jevne
Can I rely on this case?
Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.
(as of 9/30/2026)
Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1987, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- Dannheim Development, Inc. v. Mogler (Minn. Ct. App. 1987)
- Hereford Farms Co., Inc. v. Lende (Minn. 1928)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
Plaintiff appeals from an order vacating a writ of attachment and the levy- thereunder.
On the showing made before the trial court there was dispute as to some of the facts, and the facts that were undisputed were such that different inferences and conclusions could reasonably be drawn therefrom. In that situation the rule announced in First State Bank v. Schatz, 104 Minn. 425, 116 N. W. 917, applies.
Affirmed.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.