Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Quirk, 112 N.W. 409.

37 citing documents.

State v. Norgaard 136 N.W.2d 628 Minn. 1965
State v. Norgaard 136 N.W.2d 628 Minn. 1965
See, State v. Bock, 229 Minn. 449 , 39 N. W. (2d) 887 ; State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334 , .
State v. Elli 125 N.W.2d 738 Minn. 1964
State v. Elli 125 N.W.2d 738 Minn. 1964
State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334 , ; State v. Garden, 267 Minn. 97 , 125 N. W. (2d) 591 .
State v. Garden 125 N.W.2d 591 Minn. 1963
State v. Garden 125 N.W.2d 591 Minn. 1963
State v. Russell, 69 Minn. 502 , ; State v. Cooley, 72 Minn. 476 , ; State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334 , .
Simcoe v. Pope 123 N.W.2d 311 Minn. 1963
Simcoe v. Pope 123 N.W.2d 311 Minn. 1963
In no event shall such movement be made by driving off the pavement or main-traveled portion of the roadway.” 6 State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334, 339 , .
State v. Arradondo 110 N.W.2d 469 Minn. 1961
State v. Arradondo 110 N.W.2d 469 Minn. 1961
State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334 , .
State v. Gress 84 N.W.2d 616 Minn. 1957
State v. Gress 84 N.W.2d 616 Minn. 1957
Gardner v. Kellogg, 23 Minn. 463 ; State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334 , ; State v. Phillips, 105 Minn. 375 , ; 20 Dunnell, *348 Dig.
Adelmann v. Elk River Lumber Co. 65 N.W.2d 661 Minn. 1954
Adelmann v. Elk River Lumber Co. 65 N.W.2d 661 Minn. 1954
7 State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334, 339 , .
State v. Gulbrandsen 57 N.W.2d 419 Minn. 1953
State v. Gulbrandsen 57 N.W.2d 419 Minn. 1953
848 ; State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334 , 112 N.W.
State v. Brown 296 N.W. 582 Minn. 1941
State v. Brown 296 N.W. 582 Minn. 1941
449 (identification of accused by the victim of the crime); State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334 , 2 Dunnell, Minn. Dig.
State v. Wood 211 N.W. 305 Minn. 1926
State v. Wood 211 N.W. 305 Minn. 1926
G. A. Bank v. Lawrence, 77 Minn. 282 (289), , ; State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334 , ; State v. Eight, 106 Minn. 371 , ; State v. Seeling, 126 Minn. 386 , .
State v. Friend 191 N.W. 926 Minn. 1923
State v. Nelson 181 N.W. 850 Minn. 1921
State v. Nelson 181 N.W. 850 Minn. 1921
State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334 , ; State v. Phillips, 105 Minn. 375 , ; State v. McCoy, 112 Minn. 424 , .
State v. Taylor 175 N.W. 615 Minn. 1920
State v. Taylor 175 N.W. 615 Minn. 1920
Gardner v. Kellogg, 23 Minn. 463 ; State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334 , ; State v. Phillips, 105 Minn. 375 , ; 3 Dunnell, Minn. Dig.
State v. Johnson 131 N.W. 629 Minn. 1911
State v. Johnson 131 N.W. 629 Minn. 1911
The county attorney evidently proceeded on the rule laid down in State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334 , , and on the theory that the evidence, if brought out, would affect the credibility of the witness, and this was apparently his only purpose.
State v. Fournier 122 N.W. 329 Minn. 1909
State v. Fournier 122 N.W. 329 Minn. 1909
A. No, sir.” We do not intend to limit or restrict the rule with reference to proper cross-examination which was applied in State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334, 335 , ; but the limit is clearly reached and passed when questions are asked manifestly for the purpose of creating prejudice in the minds of the jurors, or the examination is carried on in such a manner or to such an extent as to become oppressive, and is not warranted by anything in the case.
Jeremy v. Matsch 118 N.W. 1008 Minn. 1908
State v. Kight 119 N.W. 56 Minn. 1908
Jeremy v. Matsch 118 N.W. 1008 Minn. 1908
State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334 , ; Steele v. Malony, 1 Minn. 257 (347).
State v. Kight 119 N.W. 56 Minn. 1908
722; State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334 , ).
State v. Phillips 117 N.W. 508 Minn. 1908
State v. Phillips 117 N.W. 508 Minn. 1908
This discretion, however, should not go so far as to sanction an attempt to discredit a witness by innuendo instead of competent evidence.” State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334 , .
State v. Gordon 117 N.W. 483 Minn. 1908
State v. Gordon 117 N.W. 483 Minn. 1908
Section 4780, R. L. 1905; State v. Quirk, 101 Minn. 334 , ; Wigmore, Ev.