Graupmann v. Rental Equipment & Sales Co.

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Graupmann v. Rental Equipment & Sales Co.

425 N.W.2d 861, 1988 Minn. App. LEXIS 601, 1988 WL 70327

CourtCourt of Appeals of Minnesota

DecidedJuly 12, 1988

DocketC9-88-1195

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 425 N.W.2d 861 (Graupmann v. Rental Equipment & Sales Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Graupmann v. Rental Equipment & Sales Co., 425 N.W.2d 861, 1988 Minn. App. LEXIS 601, 1988 WL 70327 (Mich. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

Opinion

SPECIAL TERM OPINION

WOZNIAK, Chief Judge.

FACTS

Appellants commenced this action against respondents, who then moved for summary judgment based on res judicata. The trial court granted that motion by order dated April 27, 1988, completely dismissing appellants’ action. Appellants filed this appeal on June 6 seeking review of the April 27 order for summary judgment. This court questioned jurisdiction and directed the parties to file memoranda on the appealability of the order.

DECISION

An order granting summary judgment is nonappealable. Credit Union of Minneapolis Board of Realtors v. Ralston, 296 Minn. 491, 492, 206 N.W.2d 657, 658 (1973); Minn.R.Civ.App.P. 103.03. The April 27 order is not appealable and the proper appeal is from a judgment entered pursuant to that order. See Minn.R.Civ. App.P. 103.03(a).

Counsel claims the district court administrator indicated it does not generally enter judgment where an order dismisses an action. (In fact, no judgment has yet been entered pursuant to the April 27 order.) The district court administrator is required to enter “judgment upon the verdict of a jury, or upon an order of the court for the recovery of money only or for costs or that all relief be denied * * Minn. R.Civ.P. 58.01 (emphasis added). Although the April 27 order failed to specifically direct entry of judgment, the district court administrator is required by Rule 58.01 to enter judgment. The district court administrator must enter judgment on all orders of dismissal, except dismissals for lack of jurisdiction. Id.; see Bulau v. Bulau, 208 Minn. 529, 530, 294 N.W. 845, 846-47 (1940).

Appeal dismissed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SPECIAL TERM OPINION

WOZNIAK, Chief Judge.

FACTS

Appellants commenced this action against respondents, who then moved for summary judgment based on res judicata. The trial court granted that motion by order dated April 27, 1988, completely dismissing appellants’ action. Appellants filed this appeal on June 6 seeking review of the April 27 order for summary judgment. This court questioned jurisdiction and directed the parties to file memoranda on the appealability of the order.

DECISION

An order granting summary judgment is nonappealable. Credit Union of Minneapolis Board of Realtors v. Ralston, 296 Minn. 491, 492, 206 N.W.2d 657, 658 (1973); Minn.R.Civ.App.P. 103.03. The April 27 order is not appealable and the proper appeal is from a judgment entered pursuant to that order. See Minn.R.Civ. App.P. 103.03(a).

Counsel claims the district court administrator indicated it does not generally enter judgment where an order dismisses an action. (In fact, no judgment has yet been entered pursuant to the April 27 order.) The district court administrator is required to enter “judgment upon the verdict of a jury, or upon an order of the court for the recovery of money only or for costs or that all relief be denied * * Minn. R.Civ.P. 58.01 (emphasis added). Although the April 27 order failed to specifically direct entry of judgment, the district court administrator is required by Rule 58.01 to enter judgment. The district court administrator must enter judgment on all orders of dismissal, except dismissals for lack of jurisdiction. Id.; see Bulau v. Bulau, 208 Minn. 529, 530, 294 N.W. 845, 846-47 (1940).

Appeal dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

425 N.W.2d 861, 1988 Minn. App. LEXIS 601, 1988 WL 70327, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/graupmann-v-rental-equipment-sales-co-minnctapp-1988.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack