v. Nelson, 409 N.W.2d 222, 224 (Minn.App.1987); cf. McCollum v. Western Nat’l Mut. Ins. Co., 597 N.W.2d 307, 309 (Minn.App.1999) (right to appeal not waived by involuntarily satisfied judgment). Because the judgment against Waddill was involuntarily satisfied, her motion to vacate was not moot and should not have been dismissed. We note that Reardon was decided before Dorso and that the broad language of Dorso may suggest that the supreme court implicitly rejected the Reardon exception for involuntarily satisfied judgments. We do not believe this was the court’s intent, however. While the court has made clear that the Dorso rule is to have broad application, it also has recognized circumstances in which the rule does not apply. See Jorissen v. Miller, 399 N.W.2d 82, 84 (Minn.1987) (<HOLDING>). The majority rule on the right to appeal
holding art v  8b does not apply to judgments rendered by the office of workers compensation holding that the discovery rule does not apply to  bill of review claims to set aside probate judgments holding that the requirements of title iii apply and must be satisfied recognizing that judgments of arizona courts on foreign judgments will not be conclusive in the jurisdiction of origin holding rule does not apply to satisfied conciliationcourt judgments