Cent. Hous. Assocs., LP v. Olson, 929 N.W.2d 398 (2019)

Citation: Cent. Hous. Assocs., LP v. Olson, 929 N.W.2d 398 (2019)
Parent Document: Cent. Hous. Assocs., LP v. Olson, 929 N.W.2d 398 (2019)
Jurisdiction: Minnesota (state)
Effective Date: 2019-06-12
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/8288834/cent-hous-assocs-lp-v-olson/ ↗

Full Text

593 chars

According to the district court's post-trial order, CHA did not object to the retaliation-defense question being posed to the jury. Following trial, however, CHA moved for judgment as a matter of law on the ground that Olson's retaliation defense was not available as a matter of law. The district court denied CHA's motion, determining that CHA had waived the argument.1 The district court entered judgment for possession of the rental unit in favor of Olson, apparently based on the existence of a retaliation defense under Minn. Stat. § 504B.285, subd. 2 (2018), and Minn. Stat. § 504B.441.

Other Sections in This Document (68)

Full Text