Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Schmit v. Esser, 236 N.W. 622.

48 citing documents.

Broek v. Park Nicollet Health Services 660 N.W.2d 439 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Broek v. Park Nicollet Health Services 660 N.W.2d 439 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
This rule is predicated on the rationale that “the patient must repose reliance upon his physician in the completion of the course of curative treatment, a relationship of trust which inhibits the patient’s ability to discover acts of omission or commission constituting malpractice.” Swang v. Hauser, 288 Minn. 306, 309 , -90 (1970); see also Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354, 358-59 , 236 N.W.
Ciardelli v. Rindal 582 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 1998
Ciardelli v. Rindal 582 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 1998
There are “three factors to be considered in determining when treatment ceases: (1) whether there is a relationship between physician and patient with regard to the illness; (2) whether the physician is attending and examining the patient; and (3) whether there is something more to be done.” Grondahl, d at 243 ’ (citing Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354, 358-59 , 236 N.W.
Berres v. Anderson 561 N.W.2d 919 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Berres v. Anderson 561 N.W.2d 919 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354, 359 , 236 N.W.
Zagaros v. Erickson 558 N.W.2d 516 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Zagaros v. Erickson 558 N.W.2d 516 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354, 358-59 , 236 N.W.
Bliss v. Stevens 544 N.W.2d 50 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Bliss v. Stevens 544 N.W.2d 50 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
(citing Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354, 358-59 , 236 N.W.
Fabio v. Bellomo 504 N.W.2d 758 Minn. 1993
Fabio v. Bellomo 504 N.W.2d 758 Minn. 1993
Johnson v. Winthrop Laboratories Division of Sterling Drug, Inc., 291 Minn. 145, 149 , Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354, 358 , 236 N.W.
Fabio v. Bellomo 489 N.W.2d 241 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Fabio v. Bellomo 489 N.W.2d 241 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354, 358 , 236 N.W.
Chizmadia v. Smiley's Point Clinic 428 N.W.2d 459 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Chizmadia v. Smiley's Point Clinic 428 N.W.2d 459 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354 , 236 N.W.
Offerdahl v. University of Minnesota Hospitals & Clinics 411 N.W.2d 20 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Offerdahl v. University of Minnesota Hospitals & Clinics 411 N.W.2d 20 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354, 358 , 236 N.W.
Koderick v. Snyder Bros. Drug, Inc. 413 N.W.2d 856 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Koderick v. Snyder Bros. Drug, Inc. 413 N.W.2d 856 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
See Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354, 358 , 236 N.W.
Peterson v. Fortier 406 N.W.2d 563 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Peterson v. Fortier 406 N.W.2d 563 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Grondahl, d at 243 (citing Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354, 358-59 , 236 N.W.
Kensinger v. Kippen 390 N.W.2d 815 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Kensinger v. Kippen 390 N.W.2d 815 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
See Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354, 358 , 236 N.W.
Miller v. Mercy Medical Center 380 N.W.2d 827 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Miller v. Mercy Medical Center 380 N.W.2d 827 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Johnson v. Winthrop Laboratories Division of Sterling Drug, Inc., 291 Minn. 145 , Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354, 358 , 236 N.W.
Krause v. Farber 379 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Krause v. Farber 379 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354, 359 , 236 N.W.
Giles v. Sanford Memorial Hospital & Nursing Home 371 N.W.2d 635 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Giles v. Sanford Memorial Hospital & Nursing Home 371 N.W.2d 635 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
(quoting Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354, 358-59 , 236 N.W.
Noland v. Freeman 344 N.W.2d 419 Minn. 1984
Noland v. Freeman 344 N.W.2d 419 Minn. 1984
Johnson v. Winthrop Laboratories Division of Sterling Drug, Inc., 291 Minn. 145 , Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354 , 236 N.W.
Grondahl v. Bulluck 318 N.W.2d 240 Minn. 1982
Grondahl v. Bulluck 318 N.W.2d 240 Minn. 1982
Johnson v. Winthrop Laboratories Division of Sterling Drug, Inc., 291 Minn. 145 , Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354 , 236 N.W.
Togstad v. Vesely, Otto, Miller & Keefe 291 N.W.2d 686 Minn. 1980
Togstad v. Vesely, Otto, Miller & Keefe 291 N.W.2d 686 Minn. 1980
E. g., Swang v. Hauser, 288 Minn. 306 , Schmidt v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354 , 236 N.W.
Murray v. Fox 220 N.W.2d 356 Minn. 1974
Murray v. Fox 220 N.W.2d 356 Minn. 1974
183 Minn. 354 , , 74 A. L. R. 1312 (1931).
Johnson v. Winthrop Laboratories Division of Sterling Drug, Inc. 190 N.W.2d 77 Minn. 1971
Johnson v. Winthrop Laboratories Division of Sterling Drug, Inc. 190 N.W.2d 77 Minn. 1971
The leading case on the question of when the statute of limitations begins to run on a medical malpractice claim against a physician is Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354 , , 74 A. L. R. 1312.
Swang v. Hauser 180 N.W.2d 187 Minn. 1970
Swang v. Hauser 180 N.W.2d 187 Minn. 1970
183 Minn. 354 , , 74 A. L. R. 1312; Couillard v. Charles T. Miller Hospital, Inc. 253 Minn. 418 , 92 N. W. (2d) 96 .
Manion v. Tweedy 100 N.W.2d 124 Minn. 1959
Manion v. Tweedy 100 N.W.2d 124 Minn. 1959
The italicized portion of the requested instruction quoted above is taken almost verbatim from Schmit v. Esser, 183 Minn. 354 , , 74 A. L. R. 1312.
Couillard v. Charles T. Miller Hospital, Inc. 92 N.W.2d 96 Minn. 1958
Couillard v. Charles T. Miller Hospital, Inc. 92 N.W.2d 96 Minn. 1958
183 Minn. 354 , , 74 A. L. R. 1312.
Plotnik v. Lewis 261 N.W. 867 Minn. 1935
Plotnik v. Lewis 261 N.W. 867 Minn. 1935
183 Minn. 354 , , 71 A. L. R. 1312, show that if here was any malpractice it took place on December 27, 1931, and the cause of action accrued then, and that nothing by way of treatment or otherwise has since tolled the running of the statute.