Skip to main content
DRAFT FOR ATTORNEY REVIEW — NOT FINAL

Hoglund-Hall v. Kleinschmidt, 381 N.W.2d 889 (1986)

Citation
Hoglund-Hall v. Kleinschmidt, 381 N.W.2d 889 (1986)
Parent Document
Hoglund-Hall v. Kleinschmidt, 381 N.W.2d 889 (1986)
Jurisdiction
Minnesota (state)
Effective Date
1986-02-18

Other Sections in This Document (80)

Full Text

877 chars
Respondents claim to have complied with the FmHA regulations regarding pre-eviction notice requirements in terminating the lease. The regulations do not require pre-eviction notice in all situations, in respondents’ view, but only where required by the lease or by state law. Respondents argue that the terms of the lease (paragraphs 16 and 21) do not require prior notice of termination. They reason that where action of the tenant is a threat to the health and safety of the other tenants, other notice terms in the lease do not apply and the eviction shall be accomplished under state law. Respondents argue that state law does not require pre-eviction notice prior to service of a summons and complaint in unlawful detainer under Minn.Stat. §§ 566.-05 and 566.06 which govern the form of summons and complaint and, therefore, written notice of termination was not required.