Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Evans v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co., 158 N.W. 335.

30 citing documents.

Van Tassel v. Horace Mann Insurance Company 207 N.W.2d 348 Minn. 1973
Van Tassel v. Horace Mann Insurance Company 207 N.W.2d 348 Minn. 1973
Co. 138 Minn. 293 , State ex rel.
Beschnett v. Farmers Equitable Insurance Co. 146 N.W.2d 861 Minn. 1966
Beschnett v. Farmers Equitable Insurance Co. 146 N.W.2d 861 Minn. 1966
Co. 133 Minn. 293, 294 , ; Dahlin v. Kron, 232 Minn. 312, 320 , 45 N. W. (2d) 833, 837 ; Wilson v. Home Gas Co. Inc. 267 Minn. 162, 167 , 125 N. W. *333 (2d) 725, 729; Collins v. Farmers Ins.
Wilson v. Home Gas Co. Inc. 125 N.W.2d 725 Minn. 1964
Wilson v. Home Gas Co. Inc. 125 N.W.2d 725 Minn. 1964
Co. 133 Minn. 293 , ; see, State ex rel.
Maher v. Roisner 57 N.W.2d 810 Minn. 1953
Maher v. Roisner 57 N.W.2d 810 Minn. 1953
Co. 133 Minn. 293 , ; Swanson v. Swanson, 196 Minn. 298 , ; Crowley v. Burns Boiler & Mfg.
Jeddeloh v. Hockenhull 18 N.W.2d 582 Minn. 1945
Jeddeloh v. Hockenhull 18 N.W.2d 582 Minn. 1945
Co. 133 Minn. 293 , ; Krenik v. Westerman, 201 Minn. 255 , .
Donohue v. Acme Heating Sheet Metal & Roofing Co. 8 N.W.2d 618 Minn. 1943
Donohue v. Acme Heating Sheet Metal & Roofing Co. 8 N.W.2d 618 Minn. 1943
Co. 133 Minn. 293 , ; State ex rel.
Midland Loan Finance Co. v. Security Insurance Co. 293 N.W. 313 Minn. 1940
Midland Loan Finance Co. v. Security Insurance Co. 293 N.W. 313 Minn. 1940
Co. 133 Minn. 293 , ; Roth v. Chatios, 97 Conn. 282 , 116 A. 332 , 22 A. L. R. 1554.
State v. Elias 285 N.W. 475 Minn. 1939
State v. Elias 285 N.W. 475 Minn. 1939
Lorberbaum v. Christopher 269 N.W. 646 Minn. 1936
Lorberbaum v. Christopher 269 N.W. 646 Minn. 1936
Lund v. Olson 234 N.W. 310 Minn. 1931
Lund v. Olson 234 N.W. 310 Minn. 1931
Co. 133 Minn. 293, 295 , ) wherein it was held error to admit in evidence a preserved, amputated hand when it was “offered in evidence for the purpose of showing damages and pain and suffering,” is not here in point.
Solberg v. Minneapolis Willys-Knight Co. 224 N.W. 271 Minn. 1929
Solberg v. Minneapolis Willys-Knight Co. 224 N.W. 271 Minn. 1929
Co. 133 Minn. 293 , ; Rhinehart v. D. & R. G. R. Co. 61 Colo.
State v. Watzek 197 N.W. 669 Minn. 1924
State v. Watzek 197 N.W. 669 Minn. 1924
Co. 133 Minn. 293 , , but in these cases and many others the rule is recognized that the admission of improper testimony is not ground for a reversal, if it is reasonably clear that the party objecting was not prejudiced.
Berkholz v. Benepe 190 N.W. 800 Minn. 1922
Berkholz v. Benepe 190 N.W. 800 Minn. 1922
Co. 133 Minn. 293 , ; State v. District Court of St.
Wentworth v. Butler 159 N.W. 828 Minn. 1916
Wentworth v. Butler 159 N.W. 828 Minn. 1916
Co. 133 Minn. 293 , ; State v. District Court of St.
State ex rel. City of Duluth v. District Court 158 N.W. 791 Minn. 1916
State ex rel. City of Duluth v. District Court 158 N.W. 791 Minn. 1916
Co. 133 Minn. 293 , ; Nashville, C. & St.