DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Lemkuhl v. Clark, 296 N.W. 28.

36 citing documents.

  • Farnam v. Linden Hills Congregational Church 149 N.W.2d 689 Minn. 1967
  • Farnam v. Linden Hills Congregational Church 149 N.W.2d 689 Minn. 1967
    tated by this court in Barker v. Bemidji Wood Products Co. 184 Minn. 366, 368 , , 7 W. C. D. 50, 51, “One case may be clearly, that of employer and employe; another clearly of independent contractor; and another may be perplexing and uncertain and involve a question of fact.” While a definition has not been attempted applicable to all situations, this court in Lemkuhl v. Clark, 209 Minn. 276, 277 , , 11 W. C. D. 397, 398, laid down the following rule as a guide: “In determining whether the relat
  • Pettis v. Harken, Inc. 116 N.W.2d 565 Minn. 1962
  • Distinguished Pettis v. Harken, Inc. 116 N.W.2d 565 Minn. 1962
    Relators rely on Fahey v. Terp, 235 Minn. 432 , 51 N. W. (2d) 273 , and Lemkuhl v. Clark, 209 Minn. 276 , .
  • Mount v. City of Redwood Falls 108 N.W.2d 443 Minn. 1961
  • Mount v. City of Redwood Falls 108 N.W.2d 443 Minn. 1961
    227 Minn. 303 , 35 N. W. (2d) 430 ; Oestreich v. Lakeside Cemetery Assn. 229 Minn. 209 , 38 N. W. (2d) 193 ; Hansen v. Adent, 238 Minn. 540 , 57 N. W. (2d) 681 ; Angeli v. White Eagle Oil & Refining Co. 169 Minn. 183 , ; Lemkuhl v. Clark, 209 Minn. 276 , .
  • Christopherson v. Security State Bank of Oklee 97 N.W.2d 649 Minn. 1959
  • Christopherson v. Security State Bank of Oklee 97 N.W.2d 649 Minn. 1959
    In Lemkuhl v. Clark, 209 Minn. 276, 277 , , we said: “In determining whether the relationship is one of employe or independent contractor, the most important factor is the right of the employer to control the means and manner of performance.
  • Moorhead v. Grassle 93 N.W.2d 678 Minn. 1958
  • Moorhead v. Grassle 93 N.W.2d 678 Minn. 1958
    *108 Although no hard-and-fast definition can be applied to every case in determining if the relationship of employer and employee exists, a reasonable test was laid out by the court in Lemkuhl v. Clark, 209 Minn. 276, 277 , , where it was stated: “In determining whether the relationship is one of employe or independent contractor, the most important factor is the right of the employer to control the means and manner of performance.
  • Rosvold v. Independent Consolidated School District No. 102 87 N.W.2d 646 Minn. 1958
  • Rosvold v. Independent Consolidated School District No. 102 87 N.W.2d 646 Minn. 1958
    In Fahey v. Terp, 235 Minn. 432, 433 , 51 N. W. (2d) 273, 274 , quoting from Lemkuhl v. Clark, 209 Minn. 276, 277 , , this court said: “In determining whether the relationship is one of employe or independent contractor, the most important factor is the right of the employer to control the means and manner of performance.
  • Koktavy v. City of New Prague 75 N.W.2d 774 Minn. 1956
  • Koktavy v. City of New Prague 75 N.W.2d 774 Minn. 1956
    5 Bolin v. Scheurer, 210 Minn. 15 , ; Lemkuhl v. Clark, 209 Minn. 276 , ; Wicklund v. North Star Timber Co. 205 Minn. 595 , ; Graf v. Montgomery Ward & Co. Inc. 234 Minn. 485 , 49 N. W. (2d) 797 ; Hansen v. Adent, 238 Minn. 540 , 57 N. W. (2d) 681 ; Castner v. *554 Christgau, 222 Minn. 61 , 24 N. W. (2d) 228 ; Schneider v. Salvation Army, 217 Minn. 448 , 14
  • Fahey v. Terp 51 N.W.2d 273 Minn. 1952
  • Fahey v. Terp 51 N.W.2d 273 Minn. 1952
    In Lemkuhl v. Clark, 209 Minn. 276, 277 , , we said: “In determining whether the relationship is one of employe or independent contractor, the most important factor is the right of the employer to control the means and manner of performance.
  • Graf v. Montgomery Ward & Co. 49 N.W.2d 797 Minn. 1951
  • Graf v. Montgomery Ward & Co. 49 N.W.2d 797 Minn. 1951
    Lemkuhl v. Clark, 209 Minn. 276 , ; Herron v. Coolsaet Bros. 158 Minn. 522 , ; Bosel v. Henderson Holding Co. 167 Minn. 72 , ; 12 Minn. L. Rev. 83 .
  • Gartner v. Hogstad Fish Co. 43 N.W.2d 798 Minn. 1950
  • Gartner v. Hogstad Fish Co. 43 N.W.2d 798 Minn. 1950
    175 Minn. 547 , ; Holmberg v. Amundson, 177 Minn. 55 , , ; Lange v. American Spawn Co. 194 Minn. 342 , ; Lemkuhl v. Clark, 209 Minn. 276 , .
  • Otten v. University Hospitals 40 N.W.2d 81 Minn. 1949
  • Otten v. University Hospitals 40 N.W.2d 81 Minn. 1949
    Oestreich v. Lakeside Cemetery Assn. 229 Minn. 209 , 38 N. W. (2d) 193 ; Gill v. Northwest Airlines, Inc. 228 Minn. 164 , 36 N. W. (2d) 785 ; Korthuis v. Soderling & Sons, 218 Minn. 342 , 16 N. W. (2d) 285 ; Lemkuhl v. Clark, 209 Minn. 276 , ; 6 Dunnell, Dig.
  • Pederson v. Pederson 39 N.W.2d 893 Minn. 1949
  • Pederson v. Pederson 39 N.W.2d 893 Minn. 1949
  • Pederson v. Pederson 39 N.W.2d 893 Minn. 1949
    608 ; Lemkuhl v. Clark, 209 Minn. 276 , 296 N.W.
  • Pederson v. Pederson 39 N.W.2d 893 Minn. 1949
    Bosel v. Henderson Holding Co. 167 Minn. 72 , ; Angell v. White Eagle O. & R. Co. 169 Minn. 183 , ; Moore v. Kileen & Gillis, 171 Minn. 15 , ; Krause v. Bodin, 172 Minn. 467 , ; Schonberg v. Zinsmaster Baking Co. 173 Minn. 414 , ; Nesseth v. Skelly Oil Co. 176 Minn. 373 , ; Lemkuhl v. Clark, 209 Minn. 276 , ; Byhardt v. Ballord, 209 Minn. 391 , ; Bolin v. Scheurer, 210 Minn. 15 , ; Larson v. Le Mere, 220 Minn. 25 , 18 N. W. (2d) 696 .
  • Larson v. Le Mere 18 N.W.2d 696 Minn. 1945
  • Larson v. Le Mere 18 N.W.2d 696 Minn. 1945
    “E. T. Le Mere “E. L. Kuhn” 3 Lemkuhl v. Clark, 209 Minn. 276 , .
  • Bergstrom v. Brehmer 8 N.W.2d 328 Minn. 1943
  • Bergstrom v. Brehmer 8 N.W.2d 328 Minn. 1943
    In Lemkuhl v. Clark, 209 Minn. 276, 277 , , this court aptly said: “In determining whether the relationship is one of employer or independent contractor, the most important factor is the right of the employer to control the means and manner of performance.
  • James v. Peterson 1 N.W.2d 844 Minn. 1942
  • James v. Peterson 1 N.W.2d 844 Minn. 1942
    Minn. 276, ; Ledoux v. Joncas, 163 Minn. 498 , ) do not give us much aid here.
  • Bolin v. Scheurer 297 N.W. 106 Minn. 1941
  • Bolin v. Scheurer 297 N.W. 106 Minn. 1941
    The most important element for determining the existence of an employment relationship is “the right of the employer to control the means and manner of performance.” Lemkuhl v. Clark, 209 Minn. 276, 277 , .
  • Byhardt v. Ballord 296 N.W. 504 Minn. 1941
  • Byhardt v. Ballord 296 N.W. 504 Minn. 1941
    Lemkuhl v. Clark, 209 Minn. 276 , ; Bushnell v. City of Duluth, 209 Minn. 27 , ; Wicklund v. North Star Timber Co. 205 Minn. 595 , .