Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Mattson v. Minnesota & North Wisconsin Railroad, 108 N.W. 517.

31 citing documents.

Martz v. Revier 170 N.W.2d 83 Minn. 1969
Martz v. Revier 170 N.W.2d 83 Minn. 1969
R. Co. 98 Minn. 296 , ; Jenson v. Glemaker, 195 Minn. 556 , ; Mattfeld v. Nester, 226 Minn. 106 , 32 N. W. (2d) 291 , 3 A. L. R. (2d) 909; Shumway v. Nelson, 259 Minn. 319 , 107 N. W. (2d) 531 ; Hondl v. Chicago G. W. Ry.
City of Litchfield v. TOWNSHIP OF PAYNESVILLE 103 N.W.2d 402 Minn. 1960
City of Litchfield v. TOWNSHIP OF PAYNESVILLE 103 N.W.2d 402 Minn. 1960
Mattson v. M. & N. W. R. Co. 98 Minn. 296 , .” The trial court in the instant case in its memorandum attached to its order denying a new trial said: *217 “If the case had to be decided solely on the testimony of Florence Kinlund it would be an almost impossible task.
Hondl v. Chicago Great Western Railway Co. 82 N.W.2d 245 Minn. 1957
Hondl v. Chicago Great Western Railway Co. 82 N.W.2d 245 Minn. 1957
Kokesh v. Price, 136 Minn. 304 , , 23 A. L. R. 643; Mattfeld v. Nester, 226 Minn. 106 , 32 N. W. (2d) 291 , 3 A. L. R. (2d) 909; Jenson v. Glemaker, 195 Minn. 556 , ; Mattson v. Minnesota & North Wisconsin R. Co. 98 Minn. 296 , ; Anderson v. Anderson, 188 Minn. 602 , .
Ostrowski v. Mockridge 65 N.W.2d 185 Minn. 1954
Ostrowski v. Mockridge 65 N.W.2d 185 Minn. 1954
Mattson v. M. & N. W. R. Co. 98 Minn. 296 , .” In the Dix case we approved reception of certain audits not prepared by or under the supervision or direction of the witness identifying them; not made at the time of the transactions they purported to record; and notwithstanding that the books from which they were compiled were available for submis
Dix v. Harris Machinery Co. 60 N.W.2d 628 Minn. 1953
Dix v. Harris Machinery Co. 60 N.W.2d 628 Minn. 1953
Mattson v. M. & N. W. R. Co. 98 Minn. 296 , .
Doren ex rel. Doren v. Northwestern Baptist Hospital Ass'n 60 N.W.2d 361 Minn. 1953
Doren ex rel. Doren v. Northwestern Baptist Hospital Ass'n 60 N.W.2d 361 Minn. 1953
Mattson v. Minnesota & North Wisconsin R. Co. 98 Minn. 296 , .
Jenson v. Glemaker 263 N.W. 624 Minn. 1935
Jenson v. Glemaker 263 N.W. 624 Minn. 1935
Mattson v. M. & N. W. R. Co. 98 Minn. 296 , ; Decker v. Itasca Paper Co. 111 Minn. 439 , ; Anderson v. Anderson, 188 Minn. 602 , .
Albrecht v. Potthoff 257 N.W. 377 Minn. 1934
Luck v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 254 N.W. 609 Minn. 1934
Luck v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 254 N.W. 609 Minn. 1934
Mattson v. Minnesota & N. W. R. Co. 98 Minn. 296 , ; Decker v. Itasca Paper Co. 111 Minn. 439 , .
Anderson v. Anderson 248 N.W. 35 Minn. 1933
Anderson v. Anderson 248 N.W. 35 Minn. 1933
Mattson v. M. & N. W. R. Co. 98 Minn. 296 , Decker v. Itasca Paper Co. 111 Minn. 439 , .
Bullock v. New York Life Insurance Co. 233 N.W. 858 Minn. 1930
Bullock v. New York Life Insurance Co. 233 N.W. 858 Minn. 1930
Mattson v. Minnesota & N. W. R. Co. 98 Minn. 296 , ; Savino v. Griffin Wheel Co. 118 Minn. 290 , .
Drimel v. Union Power Co. 165 N.W. 1058 Minn. 1918
Drimel v. Union Power Co. 165 N.W. 1058 Minn. 1918
See Mattson v. Minnesota & N. W. R. Co. 98 Minn. 296 , ; Gunderson v. Northwestern Ele.
Kokesh v. Price 161 N.W. 715 Minn. 1917
Kokesh v. Price 161 N.W. 715 Minn. 1917
Mattson v. Minnesota & N. W. R. Co. 98 Minn. 296 , ; Decker v. Itasca Paper Co. 111 Minn. 439 , .
Savino v. Griffin Wheel Co. 136 N.W. 876 Minn. 1912
Savino v. Griffin Wheel Co. 136 N.W. 876 Minn. 1912
The practice of the trial judges in reading the pleadings to the jury as a part of their instructions was criticised and disapproved in Mattson v. Minnesota & N. W. R. Co. 98 Minn. 296 , , and again in Korby v. Chesser, 98 Minn. 509 , .
Decker v. Itasca Paper Co. 127 N.W. 183 Minn. 1910
Decker v. Itasca Paper Co. 127 N.W. 183 Minn. 1910
Mattson v. Minnesota & North Wisconsin R. Co., 98 Minn. 296 , ; Gunderson v. N. W. Ele.
Korby v. Chesser 108 N.W. 520 Minn. 1906
Korby v. Chesser 108 N.W. 520 Minn. 1906
Particular attention was called to the proper practice in this respect in the late case of Mattson v. Minnesota & N. W. R. Co., supra, page 296, .