DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Taubert v. Taubert, 114 N.W. 763.

39 citing documents.

  • Sara Corinne Kysylyczyn, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
    Louis v. County of Scott (Application to Determine Settlement of Fiihr) , ().
  • In Re Fiihr 184 N.W.2d 22 Minn. 1971
  • County of St. Louis v. County of Scott 184 N.W.2d 22 Minn. 1971
  • In Re Fiihr 184 N.W.2d 22 Minn. 1971
    In Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247, 249 , 114 N.W.
  • County of St. Louis v. County of Scott 184 N.W.2d 22 Minn. 1971
    In Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247, 249 , , a tort action by a minor against his parent, this court stated: “* * * The general rule is that a minor cannot sue his parent for a tort; but, if he has been emancipated, he can.- A mere *326 waiver; however, by the parent of the right to the earnings of Ms minor child, does not alone const
  • Silesky Ex Rel. Silesky v. Kelman 161 N.W.2d 631 Minn. 1968
  • Silesky Ex Rel. Silesky v. Kelman 161 N.W.2d 631 Minn. 1968
    See, Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247 , ; Miller v. Pelzer, 159 Minn. 375 , , 33 A. L. R. 678; Belleson v. Skilbeck, 185 Minn. 537 , .
  • Balts v. Balts 142 N.W.2d 66 Minn. 1966
  • Balts v. Balts 142 N.W.2d 66 Minn. 1966
    Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247 , : 249, 764 (22g).
  • London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Smith 64 N.W.2d 781 Minn. 1954
  • London Guarantee & Accident Co. v. Smith 64 N.W.2d 781 Minn. 1954
    For applications of this rule, see Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247 , ; Lund v. Olson, 183 Minn. 515 , ; Belleson v. Skilbeck, 185 Minn. 537 , ; cf. Miller v. Pelzer, 159 Minn. 375 , , 33 A. L. R. 678.
  • Barnes v. Northwest Airlines, Inc. 47 N.W.2d 180 Minn. 1951
  • Barnes v. Northwest Airlines, Inc. 47 N.W.2d 180 Minn. 1951
    § 9784; Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247 , .
  • MacIllravie v. St. Barnabas Hospital 43 N.W.2d 221 Minn. 1950
  • MacIllravie v. St. Barnabas Hospital 43 N.W.2d 221 Minn. 1950
    Cf. same with Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247 , , and Freeman v. Morris Const. Co. 179 Minn. 94 , (involving the singling out and emphasizing of the testimony of a particular witness), and Geddes v. Van Rhee, 126 Minn. 517 , (involving the centering of attention on a detail of a transaction), and Burgess v. Crafts, 184 Mi
  • Miller v. Monsen 37 N.W.2d 543 Minn. 1949
  • Miller v. Monsen 37 N.W.2d 543 Minn. 1949
    And, finally, it is contended that an action of this kind should not lie because an unemancipated child has no cause of action against its parent for a tort committed against it by the parent, citing Belleson v. Skilbeck, 185 Minn. 537 , ; Lund v. Olson, 183 Minn. 515 , ; Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247 , , and similar cases.
  • Eschenbach v. Benjamin 263 N.W. 154 Minn. 1935
  • Eschenbach v. Benjamin 263 N.W. 154 Minn. 1935
    (2 ed. & Supp. 1932) § 7308; Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247 , ; Miller v. Pelzer, 159 Minn. 375 , , 33 A. L. R. 678.
  • Belleson v. Skilbeck 242 N.W. 1 Minn. 1932
  • Belleson v. Skilbeck 242 N.W. 1 Minn. 1932
    Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247 , ; Miller v. Pelzer, 159 Minn. 375 , , 33 A. L. R. 678; Lund v. Olson, 183 Minn. 515 , ; Foley v. Foley, 61 Ill.
  • Reek v. Reek 239 N.W. 599 Minn. 1931
  • Reek v. Reek 239 N.W. 599 Minn. 1931
    s, you should conclude that the testimony given here by Louisa Reek, the old lady, is true, is correct, then, I charge you to find a negative answer to this question.” It is contended that this instruction singles out a Avitness in violation of decisions such as Harriott v. Holmes, 77 Minn. 245 , ; Goodhue Farmers W. H. Co. v. Davis, 81 Minn. 210 , ; Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247 , ; Kincaid v. Jungkunz, 109 Minn. 400 , ; Kerling v. G. W. Van Dusen & Co. 109 Minn. 481 , .
  • Lund v. Olson 237 N.W. 188 Minn. 1931
  • Lund v. Olson 237 N.W. 188 Minn. 1931
    Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247 , ; Miller v. Pelzer, 159 Minn. 375 , , 33 A. L. R. 678.
  • Freeman v. Morris Construction Co. 228 N.W. 442 Minn. 1929
  • Freeman v. Morris Construction Co. 228 N.W. 442 Minn. 1929
    Harriott v. Holmes, 77 Minn. 245 , ; State v. Yates, 99 Minn. 461 , ; Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247 , ; Kincaid v. Jungkunz, 109 *99 Minn. 400, ; State v. Jones, 126 Minn. 45 , ; State v. Dallas, 145 Minn. 92 , ; 6 Dunnell, Minn. Dig.
  • Miller v. Pelzer 199 N.W. 97 Minn. 1924
  • Miller v. Pelzer 199 N.W. 97 Minn. 1924
    Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247 , ; Roller v. Roller, 37 Wash.
  • State v. Dallas 176 N.W. 491 Minn. 1920
  • State v. Dallas 176 N.W. 491 Minn. 1920
    State v. Nestaval, 72 Minn. 415 , 75 N W. 725; Harriott v. Holmes, 77 Minn. 245 , ; Goodhue F. W. Co. v. Davis, 81 Minn. 210 , ; State v. Hoy, 83 Minn. 286 , ; State v. Yates, 99 Minn. 461 , ; Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247 , ; Kincaid v. Jungkunz, 109 Minn. 400 , ; State v. Almos, 122 Minn. 479 , ; Gran v. Gran, 129 Minn. 531 , ; State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , .
  • Flick v. Ellis-Hall Co. 165 N.W. 135 Minn. 1917
  • Flick v. Ellis-Hall Co. 165 N.W. 135 Minn. 1917
    We find nothing in the charge violating the procedure announced in such cases, cited by defendant, as: State v.Yates, 99 Minn. 461 , ; Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247 , ; Valley Lumber Co. v. Smith, 71 Wis.
  • Lufkin v. Harvey 154 N.W. 1097 Minn. 1915
  • Lufkin v. Harvey 154 N.W. 1097 Minn. 1915
    1674; Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247 , ; Donegan v. Davis, 66 Ala.
  • Geddes v. Van Rhee 148 N.W. 549 Minn. 1914
  • Geddes v. Van Rhee 148 N.W. 549 Minn. 1914
    Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247, 251 , .
  • Gracz v. Anderson 116 N.W. 1116 Minn. 1908
  • Gracz v. Anderson 116 N.W. 1116 Minn. 1908
    State v. Yates, 99 Minn. 461 , ; Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247 , .