DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Goss v. Goss, 113 N.W. 690.

71 citing documents.

  • Warren v. Dinter 926 N.W.2d 370 Minn. 2019
  • Warren v. Dinter 926 N.W.2d 370 Minn. 2019
    See, e.g. , Couillard v. Charles T. Miller Hosp., Inc. , 253 Minn. 418 , , 99 (1958) ; Benesh v. Garvais , 221 Minn. 1 , , 533 (1945), overruled on other grounds , 253 Minn. 418 , , 103 (1958) ; Goss v. Goss , 102 Minn. 346 , 113 N.W.
  • State v. Carillo 623 N.W.2d 922 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
  • State v. Carillo 623 N.W.2d 922 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
    Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346, 349-50 , 113 N.W.
  • Underhill v. Knox 355 N.W.2d 742 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • Underhill v. Knox 355 N.W.2d 742 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    In Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346, 351 , 113 N.W.
  • State Ex Rel. Lucas v. BOARD OF ED., ETC. 277 N.W.2d 524 Minn. 1979
  • State Ex Rel. Lucas v. BOARD OF ED., ETC. 277 N.W.2d 524 Minn. 1979
    [2] While we have not required counsel to lay foundation for impeachment of a witness for bias through cross-examination prior to the use of extrinsic evidence, Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346 , 113 N.W.
  • McKee v. Likins 261 N.W.2d 566 Minn. 1977
  • McKee v. Likins 261 N.W.2d 566 Minn. 1977
    Accord, Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346, 351 , 113 N.W.
  • Ingebritson v. TJERNLUND MANUFACTURING COMPANY 183 N.W.2d 552 Minn. 1971
  • Ingebritson v. TJERNLUND MANUFACTURING COMPANY 183 N.W.2d 552 Minn. 1971
    17, states this definition: “ ‘Physician’ means one authorized by law to practice his profession within one of the United States and in good standing in his profession, and includes surgeon.” 3 In Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346, 351 , , this court said, although in a different context, “A physician is one who is versed in medical science, a branch of which is surgery; and a surgeon is a physician who treats bodily injuries and heals by manual operations and the use of surgical instruments and appli
  • State v. Collins 150 N.W.2d 850 Minn. 1967
  • State v. Collins 150 N.W.2d 850 Minn. 1967
    See, Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346 , ; State v. Johnson, 221 Wis.
  • Genzel v. Halvorson 80 N.W.2d 854 Minn. 1957
  • Genzel v. Halvorson 80 N.W.2d 854 Minn. 1957
    mages appear to have been given under the influence of prejudice or passion “so long as the prejudice or passion is not shown to have affected the decision of the jury upon the other issues in the case.” Cox v. Chicago G. W. R. Co. 176 Minn. 437, 441 , ; Kugling v. Williamson, 231 Minn. 135 , 42 N. W. (2d) 534 ; Whitney v. Kaliske, 131 Minn. 261 , ; Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346 , ; Craig v. Cook, 28 Minn. 232 , .
  • Ahlstrom v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railroad 68 N.W.2d 873 Minn. 1955
  • Ahlstrom v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railroad 68 N.W.2d 873 Minn. 1955
    184; Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346 , ; Flemming v. Thorson, 231 Minn. 343 , 43 N. W. (2d) 225 ; Public Utilities Corp. v. McNaughton (8 Cir.) 39 F. (2d) 7.
  • Benesh v. Garvais 20 N.W.2d 532 Minn. 1945
  • Benesh v. Garvais 20 N.W.2d 532 Minn. 1945
    In Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346, 351 , , the rule was stated as follows: “* * * where one person is injured by the wrong or negligence of another, and he himself is not negligent in the selection of a medical attendant, the wrongdoer is liable for all the proximate results of his own act, although the consequences of the injury wo
  • Ross v. Duluth, Missabe & Iron Range Railway Co. 290 N.W. 566 Minn. 1940
  • Ross v. Duluth, Missabe & Iron Range Railway Co. 290 N.W. 566 Minn. 1940
    In Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346 , , the plaintiff had recovered a verdict for $4,000 damages on account of personal injuries due to the negligence of defendants.
  • Ahlsted v. Hart 275 N.W. 404 Minn. 1937
  • Ahlsted v. Hart 275 N.W. 404 Minn. 1937
    tled that “where one person is injured by the wrong or negligence of another, and he *87 ■himself is not negligent in the selection of a medical attendant, the wrongdoer is liable for all the proximate results of his own act, although the consequences of the injury would have.been less serious than they proved to be if the attendant had exercised proper professional skill and care.” Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346, 351 , .
  • Birdsall v. Duluth-Superior Transit Co. 267 N.W. 363 Minn. 1936
  • Birdsall v. Duluth-Superior Transit Co. 267 N.W. 363 Minn. 1936
    The rule to which we adhere is succinctly stated in Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346, 348 , , 691: “The damages may have been excessive; but it cannot be inferred therefrom that they Avere the result of passion or prejudice, unless they were so large, AAdien compared Avith Avhat the evidence indicates that they ought to have been, that the court must conclude that they Avere not aAvarded
  • Smith v. Mann 239 N.W. 223 Minn. 1931
  • Smith v. Mann 239 N.W. 223 Minn. 1931
    Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346 , , was an action for personal injury, and the verdict for the plaintiff was challenged as excessive.
  • Johnson v. Mudbaden Sulphur Springs Co. 234 N.W. 680 Minn. 1931
  • Johnson v. Mudbaden Sulphur Springs Co. 234 N.W. 680 Minn. 1931
    Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346 , ; Fields v. Mankato E. T. Co. 116 Minn. 218 , .
  • Randall v. Great Northern Railway Co. 234 N.W. 298 Minn. 1931
  • Randall v. Great Northern Railway Co. 234 N.W. 298 Minn. 1931
    The record is not such as “to indicate a fair probability that the jury were influenced by passion or prejudice” in the assessment of damages within the rule of such cases as Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346, 349 , ; and Johnson v. G. N. Ry.
  • Klaman v. Hitchcock 231 N.W. 716 Minn. 1930
  • Klaman v. Hitchcock 231 N.W. 716 Minn. 1930
    The rule as to when the trial court may conditionally reduce a verdict instead of unconditionally granting a new *112 trial is clearly and fully stated in Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346, 348 , , as follows: “The rule is now too well settled to be seriously questioned that the trial court may, in actions of tort, as well as in actions on contract, in the exercise of a sound judicial discretion, when it deems a verdict excessive and the result of passion and prejudice on the part of
  • Pederson v. Eppard 231 N.W. 393 Minn. 1930
  • Pederson v. Eppard 231 N.W. 393 Minn. 1930
    Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346 , *50 ; Fields v. Mankato E. T. Co. 116 Minn. 218 , .
  • Lundblad v. Erickson 230 N.W. 473 Minn. 1930
  • Lundblad v. Erickson 230 N.W. 473 Minn. 1930
    303; Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346 , ; Wallerick v. McGill-Warner Co. 154 Minn. 341 , .
  • Cox v. Chicago Great Western Railroad 223 N.W. 675 Minn. 1929
  • Cox v. Chicago Great Western Railroad 223 N.W. 675 Minn. 1929
    Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346 , 113 N.W.
  • Korman v. Hagen 206 N.W. 650 Minn. 1925
  • Wallerick v. McGill-Warner Co. 191 N.W. 604 Minn. 1923
  • Wallerick v. McGill-Warner Co. 191 N.W. 604 Minn. 1923
    The point most strenuously urged in this court by defendants is that the verdict as to damages was influenced by passion and prejudice, which so permeated and entered into the other issues in the case as to call for an application of the rule stated in Craig v. Cook, 28 Minn. 232 , , followed and applied in Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346 , , and an unconditional new trial.
  • State ex rel. Wentworth v. Fahey 188 N.W. 260 Minn. 1922
  • State ex rel. Wentworth v. Fahey 188 N.W. 260 Minn. 1922
    See Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346 , .
  • Posch v. Payne 186 N.W. 132 Minn. 1922
  • Posch v. Payne 186 N.W. 132 Minn. 1922
    The damages are quite large, having in mind the character of the accident disclosed, and within, the rule stated in Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346 , , followed in Johnson v. Great North.
  • State v. Townley 182 N.W. 773 Minn. 1921
  • State v. Townley 182 N.W. 773 Minn. 1921
    Goss v. Goss, 102 Minn. 346 , ; State v. Nelson, 148 Minn. 285 , ; Underhill, Crim.
  • Scheurer v. Great Northern-Railway Co. 170 N.W. 505 Minn. 1919