Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite Kral v. Burlington, Cedar Rapids & Northern Railway Co., 74 N.W. 166.
-
Boland v. Garber
257 N.W.2d 384
Minn. 1977
Paul City Railway Co., 71 Minn. 438
-
Jacoboski v. Prax
187 N.W.2d 125
Minn. 1971
Co. 71 Minn. 438, 451 , , 70 A. S. R. 341: “ ‘It is sometimes said that the plaintiff may be entitled to recover if the defendant might, by the exercise of care, have avoided the consequences of the plaintiff’s negligence.
-
Weiss v. Great Northern Railway Company
176 N.W.2d 109
Minn. 1970
Co. 71 Minn. 438 , ); that defendant had actual knowledge of plaintiff’s dangerous position in the sense that defendant realized plaintiff’s predicament (Carlson v. Sanitary *281 Farm Dairies, Inc. 200 Minn. 177 , ); and after such realization, had sufficient time and the then-existing ability to avoid the collision.
-
Bymark v. Englert
168 N.W.2d 688
Minn. 1969
Co. 71 Minn. 438 , ; Kmetz v. Johnson, 261 Minn. 395, 403 , 113 N. W. (2d) 96, 101 .
-
Koval v. Thompson
136 N.W.2d 789
Minn. 1965
Co. 71 Minn. 438 , ); that defendant had actual knowledge of plaintiff’s dangerous position in the sense that defendant realized plaintiff’s predicament (Carlson v. Sanitary Farm Dairies, Inc. 200 Minn. 177 , ); and after such realization, had sufficient time and the then-existing ability to avoid the collision.
-
Kmetz v. Johnson
113 N.W.2d 96
Minn. 1962
Co. 71 Minn. 438, 452 , .
-
Connolly v. Nicollet Hotel
104 N.W.2d 721
Minn. 1960
Co. 71 Minn. 438 , ; Schultz v. Swift & Co. 210 Minn. 533 , .
-
Zuber v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.
74 N.W.2d 641
Minn. 1956
Co. 71 Minn. 438 , , 70 A. S. R. 341.
-
Ellerman v. Skelly Oil Co.
34 N.W.2d 251
Minn. 1948
Co. 71 Minn. 438 , , 70 A. S. R. 341; Merrill v. St.
-
Seward v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co.
25 N.W.2d 221
Minn. 1946
Co. 71 Minn. 488, 451 , , 70 A. S. R. 341.
-
Bryant v. Northern Pacific Railway Co.
23 N.W.2d 174
Minn. 1946
Co. 71 Minn. 438 , , 70 A. S. R. 341.
-
Porter v. Grennan Bakeries, Inc.
16 N.W.2d 906
Minn. 1944
Co. 71 Minn. 438 , , 70 A. S. R. 341; Carlson v. Connecticut Co. 94 Conn. 131 , 108 A. 531 , 8 A. L. R. 569, and annotation; 35 Am.
-
Peyla v. Duluth, Missabe Iron Range Railroad Co.
15 N.W.2d 518
Minn. 1944
Co. 71 Minn. 438, 445 , , 70 A. S. R. 341, where plaintiff crossed a street in front of two streetcars approaching: from opposite directions: “The strongest argument that can be advanced against the plaintiff’s conduct is that he did not continue to watch the west-bound car after he left the curb to cross Seventh street.
-
Turenne v. Smith
9 N.W.2d 409
Minn. 1943
Co. 71 Minn. 438, 451 , , 70 A. S. R. 341: “It is sometimes said that the plaintiff may be entitled to recover if the defendant might, by the exercise of care, have avoided the consequences of the plaintiff’s negligence.
-
Vorlicky v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.
287 N.W. 109
Minn. 1939
Co. 71 Minn. 438 , , 70 A. S. R. 341; 2 Dunnell, Minn. Dig.
-
M & M Securities Co. v. Dirnberger
250 N.W. 801
Minn. 1933
Co. 71 Minn. 438 , , 70 A.S.R.
-
Knott v. Hawley
203 N.W. 785
Minn. 1925
Co. 71 Minn. 438, 452 , , 70 Am.
-
Young v. Avery Co.
170 N.W. 693
Minn. 1919
Co. 71 Minn. 438, 446 , , 70 Am.
-
Johnson v. Johnson
163 N.W. 160
Minn. 1917
Paul City R. Co. 71 Minn. 438 , , 70 Am.
-
McKenzie v. Duluth Street Railway Co.
155 N.W. 758
Minn. 1915
Co. 71 Minn. 438 , , 70 Am.
-
Lawler v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.
152 N.W. 882
Minn. 1915
Co. 71 Minn. 438 , , 70 Am.
-
Russell v. O'Connor
139 N.W. 148
Minn. 1912
Co. 71 Minn. 438, 452 , , 70 Am.
-
Tegels v. Great Northern Railway Co.
138 N.W. 945
Minn. 1912
Co. 71 Minn. 438, 452 , , 70 Am.
-
Great Northern Express Co. v. National Surety Co.
129 N.W. 127
Minn. 1911
Co., *167 71 Minn. 438 , , 70 Am.
-
Morris v. St. Paul City Railway Co.
117 N.W. 500
Minn. 1908
Co., 71 Minn. 438, 439 , , 70 Am.
-
Anderson v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co.
114 N.W. 1123
Minn. 1908
Co., 71 Minn. 438, 450 , , 70 Am.
-
O'Brien v. St. Paul City Railway Co.
108 N.W. 805
Minn. 1906
Co., 71 Minn. 438 , , 70 Am.
-
Continental Insurance v. Chicago & Northwestern Railway Co.
107 N.W. 548
Minn. 1906
Co., 71 Minn. 438, 449 , , 70 Am.
-
Teal v. St. Paul City Railway Co.
104 N.W. 945
Minn. 1905
Co., 71 Minn. 438 , ; Alger, Smith & Co. v. Duluth-Superior Traction Co., 93 Minn. 314 , .
-
Campbell v. Railway Transfer Co.
104 N.W. 547
Minn. 1905
Co., 71 Minn. 438 , ; Kaillen v. Northwestern B. Co., 46 Minn. 187 , .
-
Alger, Smith & Co. v. Duluth-Superior Traction Co.
101 N.W. 298
Minn. 1904
Co., 71 Minn. 450 , ; Sloniker v. Great Northern Ry.
-
Rawitzer v. St. Paul City Railway Co.
100 N.W. 664
Minn. 1904
Co., 71 Minn. 438 , ; Sloniker v. Great Northern Ry.
-
Russell v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co.
86 N.W. 346
Minn. 1901
Co., 71 Minn. 438 , ), and falls short of showing a failure to exercise reasonable and ordinary care to avoid the accident after discovering the peril plaintiff was in.
-
Lando v. Chicago, St. Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railway Co.
83 N.W. 1089
Minn. 1900
Co., 71 Minn. 488 , ; Sloniker v. Great Northern Ry.
-
Fonda v. St. Paul City Railway Co.
79 N.W. 1043
Minn. 1899
This case was before this court upon a former appeal, 71 Minn. 438 , , where the facts were quite fully examined, and the law applicable to the case stated, except such new questions as have arisen on the second trial and will be referred to further on in this opinion.
- National German-American Bank v. Lawrence 79 N.W. 1016 Minn. 1899
- Tyler v. Omeis 79 N.W. 528 Minn. 1899
- Sloniker v. Great Northern Railway Co. 79 N.W. 168 Minn. 1899
- Isackson v. Duluth Street Railway Co. 77 N.W. 433 Minn. 1898
-
Fulmore v. St. Paul City Railway Co.
75 N.W. 589
Minn. 1898
Co., 71 Minn. 438 , , and other cases relied on by the defendant.
-
McBride v. St. Paul City Railway Co.
75 N.W. 231
Minn. 1898
Co., 71 Minn. 438 , , and nothing need be added to what is there said.