Federal Land Bank of Saint Paul v. Obermoller, 429 N.W.2d 251 (1988)

Citation: Federal Land Bank of Saint Paul v. Obermoller, 429 N.W.2d 251 (1988)
Parent Document: Federal Land Bank of Saint Paul v. Obermoller, 429 N.W.2d 251 (1988)
Jurisdiction: Minnesota (state)
Effective Date: 1988-09-06
Original Source: https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/1844858/federal-land-bank-of-saint-paul... ↗

Full Text

1,141 chars

consider”). The court conducted a preliminary hearing on the unlawful detainer action on February 5. The Obermollers served their formal answer to the complaint and requested leave to file amended answers at that hearing and the court and the Obermollers' attorney discussed possible fact issues existing for trial. Although the Obermollers objected to the summary judgment proceeding as being improper and previously requested a jury trial, the record indicates they were prepared to argue their case at the hearing on the summary judgment motion which was held the day before the date set for trial. Both parties submitted affidavits and other documents and argued their respective positions at the summary judgment hearing. Although the district court suggested the parties could move for a continuance, neither the Obermollers nor the Bank would consent to an extension of the trial date. Under these circumstances, we do not believe the Obermollers were prejudiced and conclude the district court could address the parties’ claims in the unlawful detainer action by summary judgment. Cf. University Community Properties, Inc. v. Norton,

Other Sections in This Document (89)

Full Text