State v. Larson, 605 N.W.2d 706 (2000)

State v. Larson, 605 N.W.2d 706 (2000) Minnesota state

We note that the legislature has not spoken directly on the question of commercial property lease security deposits in this context. Commercial property lease security deposit regulation is limited in Minnesota to rent-to-purchase agreements. See

State v. Larson, 605 N.W.2d 706 (2000)

State v. Larson, 605 N.W.2d 706 (2000) Minnesota state

ant.” Absent more specific legislative guidance on commercial property lease security deposits, we turn to landlord-tenant law to help define the legal interest maintained by a lessor-lessee in security deposits: as debtor-creditor; as pledgor-pledg-ee; and...

§ 491A

Andrew Kaeding v. Karl Auleciems, Susanne Auleciems, 886 N.W.2d 658 (2016) Minnesota state

appellants’ claim that the security deposits were forfeited?

State v. Larson, 605 N.W.2d 706 (2000)

State v. Larson, 605 N.W.2d 706 (2000) Minnesota state

The court of appeals rejected appellant’s claims that the state failed to prove the security deposits were the “property of another.” The court of appeals distinguished security deposits from advance payments, which the court had earlier held not to...

State v. Larson, 605 N.W.2d 706 (2000)

State v. Larson, 605 N.W.2d 706 (2000) Minnesota state

Under a pledgor-pledgee relationship, the lessor may commingle the security deposit funds but is prohibited from permanently disposing of the deposit or jeopardizing the possibility of returning the deposit to the lessee. See

State v. Larson, 605 N.W.2d 706 (2000)

State v. Larson, 605 N.W.2d 706 (2000) Minnesota state

At trial, Schommer testified that appellant directed him not to return the security deposits to most of those customers who had fulfilled the terms of their automobile leases. Appellant denied directing Schom-mer to unlawfully withhold the deposits, but appellant...

§ 491A

Andrew Kaeding v. Karl Auleciems, Susanne Auleciems, 886 N.W.2d 658 (2016) Minnesota state

In this landlord-tenant dispute regarding forfeiture of security deposits, pro se

§ 491A

Andrew Kaeding v. Karl Auleciems, Susanne Auleciems, 886 N.W.2d 658 (2016) Minnesota state

The district court found that respondents’ agreement to forfeit the security deposit

§ 491A

Andrew Kaeding v. Karl Auleciems, Susanne Auleciems, 886 N.W.2d 658 (2016) Minnesota state

security deposit within two weeks after respondents began their conciliation court action.

§ 504B

Mary Cocchiarella v. Donald Driggs, 884 N.W.2d 621 (2016) Minnesota state

had given him for the security deposit and February rent payment. On February 11,

§ 504B

Mary Cocchiarella v. Donald Driggs, 884 N.W.2d 621 (2016) Minnesota state

paid Driggs the security deposit and February rent on February 3, and was thereafter

Mary Cocchiarella v. Donald Driggs, 870 N.W.2d 103 (2015)

Mary Cocchiarella v. Donald Driggs, 870 N.W.2d 103 (2015) Minnesota state

rents and security deposit funds placed with the Court” on the ground that “the security

§ 491A

Andrew Kaeding v. Karl Auleciems, Susanne Auleciems, 886 N.W.2d 658 (2016) Minnesota state

the remaining $2,700 balance of the security deposits plus $75 in costs.

§ 504B

Mary Cocchiarella v. Donald Driggs, 884 N.W.2d 621 (2016) Minnesota state

County. Driggs requested and received the first month’s rent and a security deposit, and

§ 504B

Mary Cocchiarella v. Donald Driggs, 884 N.W.2d 621 (2016) Minnesota state

she bring $2,400 in cash for her security deposit and the February rent. Cocchiarella

§ 504B

Mary Cocchiarella v. Donald Driggs, 884 N.W.2d 621 (2016) Minnesota state

she should return to the premises so Driggs could give back the security deposit. After

§ 491A

Andrew Kaeding v. Karl Auleciems, Susanne Auleciems, 886 N.W.2d 658 (2016) Minnesota state

and unambiguous language. When a tenant deposits money with a landlord to secure the

§ 491A

Andrew Kaeding v. Karl Auleciems, Susanne Auleciems, 886 N.W.2d 658 (2016) Minnesota state

the home that the tenant agrees to forfeit the entire security deposit.” This statement

§ 491A

Andrew Kaeding v. Karl Auleciems, Susanne Auleciems, 886 N.W.2d 658 (2016) Minnesota state

punitive damages because only one payment was made for the security deposits. But the

§ 491A

Andrew Kaeding v. Karl Auleciems, Susanne Auleciems, 886 N.W.2d 658 (2016) Minnesota state

ordered that the balance of the security deposits, $2,860, be returned to respondents. The