Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite McAlpine v. Fidelity & Casualty Co., 158 N.W. 967.

67 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Anthony James Trifiletti Minn. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Anthony James Trifiletti Minn. 2024
In re the Marriage of: Sheila L. Duhn, n/k/a Graff, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See 7 McAlpine v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.
State of Minnesota v. Steven Anthony Ehlen Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Steven Anthony Ehlen Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Co. of N.Y., 134 Minn. 192, 199, 158 N.W.
Frazier v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp. 788 N.W.2d 770 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Frazier v. Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corp. 788 N.W.2d 770 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Co., 134 Minn. 192, 199 , 158 N.W.
State v. Gisege 561 N.W.2d 152 Minn. 1997
State v. Gisege 561 N.W.2d 152 Minn. 1997
Co. of New York, 134 Minn. 192,199 , 158 N.W.
Majerus v. Guelsow 113 N.W.2d 450 Minn. 1962
Majerus v. Guelsow 113 N.W.2d 450 Minn. 1962
Co. 134 Minn. 192, 199 , .
Nadeau v. Melin 110 N.W.2d 29 Minn. 1961
Nadeau v. Melin 110 N.W.2d 29 Minn. 1961
State v. DeZeler 41 N.W.2d 313 Minn. 1950
State v. DeZeler 41 N.W.2d 313 Minn. 1950
Co. 134 Minn. 192 , ; State v. Allison, 330 Mo.
Pomerenke v. Farmers Life Insurance Co. 36 N.W.2d 703 Minn. 1949
Pomerenke v. Farmers Life Insurance Co. 36 N.W.2d 703 Minn. 1949
Co. 134 Minn. 192, 198 , , is not to the contrary, in that we pointed out therein that § 61.24 might apply not only to industrial but also to other forms of life insurance.
Storey v. Weinberg 31 N.W.2d 912 Minn. 1948
Storey v. Weinberg 31 N.W.2d 912 Minn. 1948
Co. 134 Minn. 192 , ; 1 Dunnell, Dig.
Ryan v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. 289 N.W. 557 Minn. 1939
Ryan v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. 289 N.W. 557 Minn. 1939
Co. 134 Minn. 192 , ; Backstrom v. New York L. Ins.
Woost v. Herberger 283 N.W. 121 Minn. 1938
Woost v. Herberger 283 N.W. 121 Minn. 1938
Dight v. Palladium Life Insurance Co. 276 N.W. 3 Minn. 1937
Dight v. Palladium Life Insurance Co. 276 N.W. 3 Minn. 1937
Speaking of such insurance, Justice Dibell in McAlpine v. Fidelity Casualty Co. 134 Minn. 192 , 196 , 158 N.W.
Haan v. Palladium National Life Insurance 275 N.W. 689 Minn. 1937
Haan v. Palladium National Life Insurance 275 N.W. 689 Minn. 1937
The subject is lucidly treated in McAlpine v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. 134 Minn. 192, 196 , .
Backstrom v. New York Life Insurance 259 N.W. 681 Minn. 1935
Backstrom v. New York Life Insurance 259 N.W. 681 Minn. 1935
Co. 134 Minn. 192, 202 , , the court said: “The circumstances surrounding the death of the insured being shoAvn, a presumption may arise that it Avas accidental rather than suicidal, and as betAveen accident and suicide the law for logical and sensible reasons supposes accident.
Wigdale v. Anderson 258 N.W. 726 Minn. 1935
Wigdale v. Anderson 258 N.W. 726 Minn. 1935
For a full discussion of the question of election of remedies see opinion of Mr. Justice Dibell in McAlpine v. Fidelity & C. Co. 131 Minn. 192 , .
Elness v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America 251 N.W. 183 Minn. 1933
Elness v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America 251 N.W. 183 Minn. 1933
Co. 134 Minn. 192 , , where the origin of nonmedical examination policies was traced, it was held that § 3396 did not apply to accident policies; and in Hafner v. Prudential Ins.
Hafner v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America 247 N.W. 576 Minn. 1933
Hafner v. Prudential Insurance Co. of America 247 N.W. 576 Minn. 1933
Smith v. Benefit Assn. of Railway Employees 244 N.W. 817 Minn. 1932
Smith v. Benefit Assn. of Railway Employees 244 N.W. 817 Minn. 1932
As to the provision relative to medical examination see McAlpine v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. 131 Minn. 192 , .
Wilcox v. Hedwall 243 N.W. 711 Minn. 1932
Wilcox v. Hedwall 243 N.W. 711 Minn. 1932
McAlpine v. Fidelity & C. Co. 134 Minn. 192 , ; School Dist.
Tiedje v. Haney 239 N.W. 611 Minn. 1931
Tiedje v. Haney 239 N.W. 611 Minn. 1931
The Avord “quality” as used in § 5813 must include poisonous character, and if the jury found as they might under the evidence that the drug company sold a deleterious drug for plaintiffs use Avhen a harmless one Avas called for, it was justified in finding for the plaintiff on the record before us. Wright v. Avenson, 174 Minn. 97, 98 , ; McAlpine v. F. & C. Co. 134 Minn. 192 , ; Willson v. Faxon, 208 N. Y. 108 , 101 N. E. 799 , 47 L.R.A.
Enge v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance 236 N.W. 207 Minn. 1931
Enge v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance 236 N.W. 207 Minn. 1931
This court in McAlpine v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. 134 Minn. 192 , , had occasion to comment on the kind of policy here involved, and what was there said is applicable here.
Lohstreter v. Federal Life Insurance Co. 234 N.W. 299 Minn. 1931
Lohstreter v. Federal Life Insurance Co. 234 N.W. 299 Minn. 1931
McAlpine v. Fidelity & Casualty Co. 134 Minn. 192 , ; Farrar v. Locomotive M. L. & A. Ins.
Wright v. Avenson 218 N.W. 453 Minn. 1928
Wright v. Avenson 218 N.W. 453 Minn. 1928
Garbush v. Order of United Commercial Travelers of America 217 N.W. 123 Minn. 1927
Garbush v. Order of United Commercial Travelers of America 217 N.W. 123 Minn. 1927
Co. 134 Minn. 192 , ; Travellers Ins.
Hawkins v. Kronick Cleaning & Laundry Co. 195 N.W. 766 Minn. 1923