Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

In re Petition of Cummins

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

December 26, 2017

In the Matter of the Petition of Melvin J. Cummins for an Order Determining Boundary Lines

         Hubbard County District Court File No. 29-CV-11-1453

          Paul 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 J. Cummins)

          Considered and decided by Cleary, Chief Judge; Ross, Judge; and Bratvold, Judge.

         SYLLABUS

         1. The 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.

         2. A 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.

         In this 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.

         Respondent 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 In an unpublished opinion, we affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for a trial on respondent's petition.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).

         In 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.

         We 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.

         DECISION

         Unless 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 ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.