Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Doyle v. City of Duluth, 76 N.W. 1029.

28 citing documents.

Kelly v. City of Rochester 231 N.W.2d 275 Minn. 1975
Kelly v. City of Rochester 231 N.W.2d 275 Minn. 1975
3 Three cases considering precedessor notice statutes illustrate this point: Doyle v. City of Duluth, 74 Minn. 157 , Lyons v. City of Red Wing, 76 Minn. 20 , Roberts v. Village of St.
Seifert v. City of Minneapolis 213 N.W.2d 605 Minn. 1973
Seifert v. City of Minneapolis 213 N.W.2d 605 Minn. 1973
3 Illustrative of this is *39 the trilogy of Doyle v. City of Duluth, 74 Minn. 157 , Lyons v. City of Red Wing, 76 Minn. 20 , Roberts v. Village of St.
Olander v. Sperry and Hutchinson Company 197 N.W.2d 438 Minn. 1972
Olander v. Sperry and Hutchinson Company 197 N.W.2d 438 Minn. 1972
Furthermore, we have held that timely service must be made on the proper municipal officials, McGuire v. Hennessy, 292 Minn. 429 , Jensen v. Downtown Auto Park, Inc. 289 Minn. 436 , Doyle v. City of Duluth, 74 Minn. 157
McGuire v. Hennessy 193 N.W.2d 313 Minn. 1971
McGuire v. Hennessy 193 N.W.2d 313 Minn. 1971
4 Doyle v. City of Duluth, 74 Minn. 157, 161 , Lyons v. City of Red Wing, 76 Minn. 20, 22 , Aronson v. City of St.
Grams v. Independent School District No. 742 176 N.W.2d 536 Minn. 1970
Grams v. Independent School District No. 742 176 N.W.2d 536 Minn. 1970
Doyle v. City of Duluth, 74 Minn. 157 , ; Roberts v. Village of St.
Freeman v. City of Minneapolis 17 N.W.2d 364 Minn. 1945
Freeman v. City of Minneapolis 17 N.W.2d 364 Minn. 1945
Doyle v. City of Duluth, 74 Minn. 157 , ; Bausher v. City of St.
Olson v. City of Virginia 300 N.W. 42 Minn. 1941
Olson v. City of Virginia 300 N.W. 42 Minn. 1941
Doyle v. City of Duluth, 74 Minn. 157 , ; Bausher v. City of St.
Aronson v. City of St. Paul 257 N.W. 662 Minn. 1934
Aronson v. City of St. Paul 257 N.W. 662 Minn. 1934
Doyle v. City of Duluth, 74 Minn. 157 , .
Szroka v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. 213 N.W. 557 Minn. 1927
Szroka v. Northwestern Bell Telephone Co. 213 N.W. 557 Minn. 1927
Paul, 72 Minn. 539 , ; Doyle v. City of Duluth, 74 Minn. 157 , ; Engstrom v. City of Minneapolis, 78 Minn. 200 , ; Peterson v. City of Red Wing, 101 Minn. 62 , ; Mitchell v. Village of Chisholm, 116 Minn. 323 , ; Wornecka v. City of St.
State ex rel. Foley Bros. & Kelly v. Minnesota Tax Commission 115 N.W. 647 Minn. 1908
State ex rel. Foley Bros. & Kelly v. Minnesota Tax Commission 115 N.W. 647 Minn. 1908
Doyle v. City of Duluth, 74 Minn. 157, 160 , .
Nicol v. City of St. Paul 83 N.W. 375 Minn. 1900
Nicol v. City of St. Paul 83 N.W. 375 Minn. 1900
Paul, 72 Minn. 539 , ; Doyle v. City of Duluth, 74 Minn. 157 , .
Engstrom v. City of Minneapolis 80 N.W. 962 Minn. 1899
Engstrom v. City of Minneapolis 80 N.W. 962 Minn. 1899
Paul, 72 Minn. 539 , ,'in which it was held that Laws 1897, c. 248, requiring notice to cities and villages of an injury for which damages were claimed, is mandatory, and that such notice is a condition precedent to the right to maintain an action to recover such damages, áee also Doyle v. City of Duluth, 74 Minn. 157 , .
Roberts v. Village of St. James 79 N.W. 519 Minn. 1899
Roberts v. Village of St. James 79 N.W. 519 Minn. 1899
In the cases of Doyle v. City of Duluth, 74 Minn. 157 , , and Lyons v. City of Red Wing, supra, page 20, we indicated some of the orderly methods for giving the notice of the injury and presenting the claim for compensation to the council.
Lyons v. City of Red Wing 78 N.W. 868 Minn. 1899
Lyons v. City of Red Wing 78 N.W. 868 Minn. 1899
Paul, 72 Minn. 539 , ; Doyle v. City of Duluth, 74 Minn. 157 , .