"It is also true that this court has several times held that if such a complaint could not, under the old practice, be sustained as a bill in equity for that purpose, it is defective, and cannot, under our practice, be sustained as a complaint in a statutory action to determine adverse claims. See Walton v. Perkins, 28 Minn. 413, 10 N.W. 424; Knudson v. Curley, 30 Minn. 433, 15 N.W. 873. But we are of the opinion that these decisions should be overruled." Palmer v. Yorks, 77 Minn. 20, 22 (Minn. 1899). See also Morris v. McClary, 43 Minn. 346, 347 (Minn. 1890) (distinguishing between cases where a plaintiff seeks equitable relief in addition to legal relief from cases where only legal relief is sought under the statute). In other words, it seems to me that the common law quiet title action is separate and distinct from the legal remedy provided under Minn. Stat. 559.01.
In the end, how does this happen? It seems to me that decisions surrounding attorney William Butler (who is openly calling for impeachment of just about all, if not all, local US District Court Judges) keep getting worse and worse. If calling for impeachment was a legal strategy, it does not appear to have helped him in the final result of this case. Is the problem Butler's lack of ideas, his inability to communicate ideas, or that no one seems to want to listen to his ideas anymore? I met with Bill Butler a few (maybe more) months ago for lunch and find him to be very sharp, well-read, genuine, creative and intelligent. I do wish him the best. I do also hope that his suspension, as referenced by the Twigg decision itself, reduces the percentage of homeowners, like Twigg, that lose potentially legitimate lawsuits.