Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Clark v. Davis, 190 N.W. 45.

40 citing documents.

In Re Welfare of Child Named Chuesberg 233 N.W.2d 887 Minn. 1975
In Re Welfare of Child Named Chuesberg 233 N.W.2d 887 Minn. 1975
State v. Gorman, supra; Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , certiorari denied, 261 U. S. 621 , 43 S. Ct. 432 , 67 L. ed. 831 (1923).
Swanson v. Williams 228 N.W.2d 860 Minn. 1975
Swanson v. Williams 228 N.W.2d 860 Minn. 1975
Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , certiorari denied, 261 U. S. 621 , 43 S. Ct. 432 , 67 L. ed. 831 (1923).
Watts Ex Rel. Watts v. Erickson 69 N.W.2d 626 Minn. 1955
Watts Ex Rel. Watts v. Erickson 69 N.W.2d 626 Minn. 1955
Lambrecht v. Schreyer, 129 Minn. 271 , , L. R. A. 1915E, 812; Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , .
State v. Quinnild 42 N.W.2d 409 Minn. 1950
State v. Quinnild 42 N.W.2d 409 Minn. 1950
In Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , , the question was raised as to the admissibility of certain evidence.
State v. Clow 10 N.W.2d 359 Minn. 1943
State v. Clow 10 N.W.2d 359 Minn. 1943
Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , ; 2 Dunnell, Dig.
Arnold v. Northern States Power Co. 297 N.W. 182 Minn. 1941
Arnold v. Northern States Power Co. 297 N.W. 182 Minn. 1941
Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143, 146, 147 , , and Schendel v. C. M. & St.
Noesen v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co. 283 N.W. 246 Minn. 1939
Noesen v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railway Co. 283 N.W. 246 Minn. 1939
Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , ; 2 Dunnell, Minn. Dig.
Jacobs v. Village of Buhl 273 N.W. 245 Minn. 1937
Jacobs v. Village of Buhl 273 N.W. 245 Minn. 1937
Co. 133 Minn. 257 , *576 ; Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , ; Perkins v. G. N. Ry.
O'Connor v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad 251 N.W. 674 Minn. 1933
O'Connor v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad 251 N.W. 674 Minn. 1933
say whether the statement came within this definition: “The utterances must spring out of the transaction, must be spontaneous, generated by an excited feeling which extends without break or let down from the moment of the event to the moment of the utterance, and under such circumstances as to reasonably preclude the idea of calculation of deliberate design.” Clark v. Davis, 158 Minn. 143, 146 , .
Dougherty v. Garrick 239 N.W. 153 Minn. 1931
Dougherty v. Garrick 239 N.W. 153 Minn. 1931
In Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , , statements by an injured person since deceased were testified to by a person interested in the outcome of the action.
Johnston v. W. S. Nott Co. 236 N.W. 466 Minn. 1931
Johnston v. W. S. Nott Co. 236 N.W. 466 Minn. 1931
Co. 130 Minn. 242 , , and again in Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , .
State v. Jue Ming 230 N.W. 639 Minn. 1930
State v. Jue Ming 230 N.W. 639 Minn. 1930
Co. 152 Minn. 226 , ; Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , ; Linderoth v. Kieffer, 162 Minn. 440 , ; State v. Gandel, 173 Minn. 305 , .
State v. Humphrey 217 N.W. 373 Minn. 1928
State v. Humphrey 217 N.W. 373 Minn. 1928
Co. 133 Minn. 257 , ; Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , ; Perkins v. G. N. Ry.
Schendel v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. 204 N.W. 552 Minn. 1925
Schendell v. C.R.I. P. Ry. Co. 204 N.W. 552 Minn. 1925
Schendell v. C.R.I. P. Ry. Co. 204 N.W. 552 Minn. 1925
Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , 190 N.W.
Schendel v. Chicago, Rock Island & Pacific Railway Co. 204 N.W. 552 Minn. 1925
Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , ; Schendel v. C. G. W. Ry.
Linderoth v. Kieffer 203 N.W. 415 Minn. 1925
Linderoth v. Kieffer 203 N.W. 415 Minn. 1925
Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , .
Perkins v. Great Northern Railway Co. 199 N.W. 891 Minn. 1924
Perkins v. Great Northern Railway Co. 199 N.W. 891 Minn. 1924
See Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , , and cases cited; Ahlberg v. Griggs, 158 Minn. 11 , .
Schendel v. Chicago Great Western Railroad 199 N.W. 111 Minn. 1924
Schendel v. Chicago Great Western Railroad 199 N.W. 111 Minn. 1924
L. R. Co. 131 Minn. 166 , , and the plaintiff cites Clark v.. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , ; St.
Schendel v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. 197 N.W. 744 Minn. 1924
Schendel v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co. 197 N.W. 744 Minn. 1924
Plaintiff seeks to justify the ruling on the authority of Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , , contending that the statement or recital was admissible as part of the res gestae.
Ahlberg v. Griggs 196 N.W. 652 Minn. 1924
Ahlberg v. Griggs 196 N.W. 652 Minn. 1924
Co. 183 Minn. 257 , ; and Clark v. Davis, 153 Minn. 143 , .

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by