Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Citation
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Parent Document
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Jurisdiction
- Minnesota (state)
- Effective Date
- 1984-03-14
- Original Source
- https://www.courtlistener.com/opinion/2101414/lea-v-pieper/ ↗
Other Sections in This Document (43)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
- Lea v. Pieper, 345 N.W.2d 267 (1984)
Full Text
285 charsafter expiration of a notice waives the notice, it would have said so. The respondents’ argument that it is inconvenient for a park owner to prorate rent where a notice to vacate specifies a date within a rental period is unpersuasive in this day of inexpensive electronic calculators.