DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co., 214 N.W. 754.

33 citing documents.

  • Roger Dean Olson, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
    Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co., 214 N.W. 754, 756 (Minn. 1927).
  • Gieseke v. IDCA, Inc. 844 N.W.2d 210 Minn. 2014
  • Gieseke v. IDCA, Inc. 844 N.W.2d 210 Minn. 2014
    See Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co., 171 Minn. 260, 261-62 , 214 N.W.
  • Kallok v. Medtronic, Inc. 573 N.W.2d 356 Minn. 1998
  • Kallok v. Medtronic, Inc. 573 N.W.2d 356 Minn. 1998
    We have held that “[t]he intentional procurement of the breach of an existent contract, without just cause or excuse, makes him who causes the breach hable for resulting damages.” Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co., 171 Minn. 260, 266 , 214 N.W.
  • Rico v. State 472 N.W.2d 100 Minn. 1991
  • Rico v. State 472 N.W.2d 100 Minn. 1991
    630, 631 (1925) (malicious interference with employment); see also Johnson v. Radde, 293 Minn. 409, 410 , (malice as grounds for punitive damages); Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co., 171 Minn. 260, 264 , 214 N.W.
  • Wild v. Rarig 234 N.W.2d 775 Minn. 1975
  • Wild v. Rarig 234 N.W.2d 775 Minn. 1975
    Co. v. Murphy Motor Freight Lines, Inc. 291 Minn. 461 , Snowden v. Sorensen, 246 Minn. 526 , Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co. 171 Minn. 260 , , 84 A. L. R. 35 (1927); Carnes v. St.
  • Electric Serv. Co. of Duluth v. Lakehead Elec. Co. 189 N.W.2d 489 Minn. 1971
  • Electric Serv. Co. of Duluth v. Lakehead Elec. Co. 189 N.W.2d 489 Minn. 1971
    See, Snowden v. Sorensen, 246 Minn. 526 , 75 N. W. (2d) 795 ; Hansen v. Barret (D. Minn.) 186 F. Supp. 527 ; Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co. 171 Minn. 260 , , 84 A. L. R. 35; Continental Research, Inc. v. Cruttenden, Podesta & Miller (D. Minn.) 222 F. Supp. 190 ; Franhan Distributors, Inc. v. New York World’s Fair (2 Cir.) 124 F. (2d) 82.
  • McDonald v. Stewart 182 N.W.2d 437 Minn. 1970
  • McDonald v. Stewart 182 N.W.2d 437 Minn. 1970
    The situation in this case is markedly different from the usual situation in which claims for interference with contractual relationships of others have been sustained, exemplified in the two cases upon which plaintiff relies: Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co. 171 Minn. 260 , ; and Johnson v. Gustafson, 201 Minn. 629 , .
  • Jensen v. Lundorff 103 N.W.2d 887 Minn. 1960
  • Jensen v. Lundorff 103 N.W.2d 887 Minn. 1960
    This court held in Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co. 171 Minn. 260 , , 84 A. L. R. 35, that when a person has knowledge of the contract rights of another and wrongfully induces a breach thereof, such inducement constitutes the destruction of a property right and is actionable.” 3 Here the action is brought not by one of the contracting parties but by one who had an inte
  • Spring Co. v. Holle 78 N.W.2d 315 Minn. 1956
  • Spring Co. v. Holle 78 N.W.2d 315 Minn. 1956
    Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co. 171 Minn. 260 , , 84 A. L. R. 35; Hornstein v. Podwitz, 254 N. Y. 443 , 173 N. E. 674 , 84 A. L. R. 1; Tatarsky v. Wavecrest Bldg.
  • Snowden v. Sorensen 75 N.W.2d 795 Minn. 1956
  • Snowden v. Sorensen 75 N.W.2d 795 Minn. 1956
    Royal Realty Co. v. Levin, 244 Minn. 288, 292 , 69 N. W. (2d) 667, 671 ; Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co. 171 Minn. 260 , , 84 A. L. R. 35.
  • Royal Realty Co. v. Levin 69 N.W.2d 667 Minn. 1955
  • Royal Realty Co. v. Levin 69 N.W.2d 667 Minn. 1955
    7 E.g. , Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co. 171 Minn. 260 , 214 N.W.
  • Lutfy v. R. D. Roper & Sons Motor Co. 115 P.2d 161 Ariz. 1941
  • Wolfson v. Northern States Management Co. 299 N.W. 676 Minn. 1941
  • Wolfson v. Northern States Management Co. 299 N.W. 676 Minn. 1941
    This court held in Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co. 171 Minn. 260 , , 84 A. L. R. 35, that when a person has knowledge of the contract rights of another and wrongfully induces a breach thereof, such inducement constitutes the destruction of a property right and is actionable.
  • Meason v. Ralston Purina Co. 107 P.2d 224 Ariz. 1940
  • Johnson v. Gustafson 277 N.W. 252 Minn. 1938
  • Johnson v. Gustafson 277 N.W. 252 Minn. 1938
    This subject was thoroughly considered in Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co. 171 Minn. 260 , , 84 A. L. R. 35.
  • Dewey v. Kaplan 274 N.W. 161 Minn. 1937
  • Dewey v. Kaplan 274 N.W. 161 Minn. 1937
    That attempt failed under the rale of Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co. 171 Minn. 260, 263, 265 , , 84 A. L. R. 35.
  • Hayward Farms Co. v. Union Savings Bank & Trust Co. 260 N.W. 868 Minn. 1935
  • Distinguished Hayward Farms Co. v. Union Savings Bank & Trust Co. 260 N.W. 868 Minn. 1935
    The case is clearly distinguishable from Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co. 171 Minn. 260 , , 84 A. L. R. 35, Avhere a malicious interference with plaintiff’s contract rights by one of the defendants Avas alleged, and from Canellos v. Zotalis, 145 Minn. 292 , , AAdiere a profitable sale by plaintiff Avas thwarted by defendant.
  • Bacich v. Northland Transportation Co. 242 N.W. 379 Minn. 1932
  • Bacich v. Northland Transportation Co. 242 N.W. 379 Minn. 1932
    Sorenson v. Chevrolet Motor Co. 171 Minn. 260 , .