In the Matter of the Petition of Melvin J. Cummins for an Order Determining Boundary Lines
County District Court File No. 29-CV-11-1453
R. Haik, Krebsbach and Haik, Ltd., Eden Prairie, Minnesota
(for appellants Anthony Urdahl, et al.)
Katherine L. Wahlberg, Thomas B. Olson, Olson, Lucas, Redford
& Wahlberg, P.A., Edina, Minnesota (for respondent Melvin
Considered and decided by Cleary, Chief Judge; Ross, Judge;
and Bratvold, Judge.
60-day appeal period under Minn. Stat. § 508.29(4)
(Supp. 2017) applies to any appealable order relating to
registered land after its original registration, including an
order denying a motion for a new trial.
proper and timely motion of a type specified in Minn. R. Civ.
App. P. 104.01, subd. 2, extends the time to appeal an order
or judgment that is appealable under Minn. Stat. §
508.29 (Supp. 2017).
SPECIAL TERM OPINION
CLEARY, Chief Judge.
appeal, which was filed on October 5, 2017, appellants
Anthony Urdahl, et al., seek review of an April 19, 2017
order granting respondent Melvin J. Cummins's petition
for an order determining boundary lines and an August 17,
2017 order denying appellants' motion for a new trial.
The parties are neighboring landowners. In 2011, respondent
filed a petition under Minn. Stat. § 508.671 (2010)
(amended 2017) to establish a boundary line between his
property and appellants' property under the theory of
boundary by practical location. The district court granted
summary judgment to appellants, ruling that the registration
of appellants' title to land conclusively established the
boundary line between the parties' properties.
appealed the dismissal of his petition. In an unpublished
opinion, we affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
for a trial on respondent's petition. In re
Cummins, No. A14-0737, 2015 WL 404648 (Minn.App. Feb. 2,
2015), review denied (Minn. Apr. 14, 2015).
December 2016, a court trial was held on respondent's
petition. The district court granted the petition in an order
filed on April 19, 2017. On May 9, 2017, appellants filed a
notice of motion and motion for amended or supplemental
findings or a new trial. In an order filed on August 17,
2017, the district court amended three findings and denied
appellants' motion for a new trial.
questioned whether the 30- or 60-day appeal period under
Minn. Stat. § 508.29 (Supp. 2017) applies and whether
appellants' motion for amended findings or a new trial
extended the time to appeal the April 19, 2017 order. The
parties filed informal memoranda.
a different time is provided by statute, an appeal may be
taken from an appealable order within 60 days after service
by any party of written notice of its filing. Minn. R. Civ.
App. P. 104.01, subd. 1. Certain types of proper and timely
postdecision motions extend the time to ...