Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Peterson v. Minnesota Power & Light Co., 288 N.W. 588.

33 citing documents.

Cory L. Hendricksen, as Trustee for the Heirs and Next of Kin of Ashton Hendricksen, decedent, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
The actor “is treated as though he were a reasonable man and, therefore, he is treated as though he knew those things which a reasonable man at the time and place would know even though the actor is himself excusably ignorant.” Peterson v. Minn. Power & Light Co. , (quotation omitted).
Senogles v. Carlson 902 N.W.2d 38 Minn. 2017
Senogles v. Carlson 902 N.W.2d 38 Minn. 2017
Audette v. Lindahl, 231 Minn. 239 , (stating that a child is required to exercise the “degree of care which would ordinarily be exercised by a child of that age, experience, and intelligence, under the same or similar circumstances”); see also Peterson v. Minn. Power & Light Co., 206 Minn. 268 , 288 N.W.
Vieths v. Ripley 295 N.W.2d 659 Minn. 1980
Vieths v. Ripley 295 N.W.2d 659 Minn. 1980
We noted in Peterson v. Minnesota Power & Light Co., 206 Minn. 268, 271-72 , 288 N.W.
Filas v. Daher 218 N.W.2d 467 Minn. 1974
Filas v. Daher 218 N.W.2d 467 Minn. 1974
Sjodin v. Lund, 277 Minn. 473 , Peterson v. Minnesota Power and Light Co. 206 Minn. 268
Brown v. Arthur Schuster, Inc. 217 N.W.2d 850 Minn. 1974
Brown v. Arthur Schuster, Inc. 217 N.W.2d 850 Minn. 1974
Sjodin v. Lund, 277 Minn. 473 , Peterson v. Minnesota Power & Light Co. 206 Minn. 268
Sjodin v. Lund 152 N.W.2d 718 Minn. 1967
Sjodin v. Lund 152 N.W.2d 718 Minn. 1967
Peterson v. Minnesota Power & Light Co. 206 Minn. 268 , .
Lieser v. Northern States Power Co. 128 N.W.2d 292 Minn. 1964
Lieser v. Northern States Power Co. 128 N.W.2d 292 Minn. 1964
It argues that breach of the duty of due care amounts to contributory negligence as a matter of law, citing Peterson v. Minnesota Power & Light Co. 206 Minn. 268 , , and Beery v. Northern States Power Co. 239 Minn. 48 , 57 N. W. (2d) 838 .
Vint v. Nelson 127 N.W.2d 177 Minn. 1964
Vint v. Nelson 127 N.W.2d 177 Minn. 1964
Jeske v. George R. Wolff Holding Co. 250 Minn. 16 , 83 N. W. (2d) 729 ; Peterson v. Minnesota Power & Light Co. 206 Minn. 268 , .
Majerus v. Guelsow 113 N.W.2d 450 Minn. 1962
Majerus v. Guelsow 113 N.W.2d 450 Minn. 1962
Peterson v. Minnesota Power & Light Co. 206 Minn. 268 , ; Northwestern Marble & Tile Co. v. Williams, 128 Minn. 514 , .
Erlandson v. Northern States Power Co. 104 N.W.2d 859 Minn. 1960
Erlandson v. Northern States Power Co. 104 N.W.2d 859 Minn. 1960
The rule applicable under such circumstances is covered in Peterson v. Minnesota Power & Light Co. 206 Minn. 268 , .
Campbell v. Siever 91 N.W.2d 474 Minn. 1958
Campbell v. Siever 91 N.W.2d 474 Minn. 1958
Peterson v. Minnesota Power & Light Co. 206 Minn. 268 , ; Northwestern M. & T. Co. v. Williams, 128 Minn. 514 , , L. R. A. 1915D, 1077.
Ahlstrom v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railroad 68 N.W.2d 873 Minn. 1955
Distinguished Ahlstrom v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railroad 68 N.W.2d 873 Minn. 1955
Similarly, Peterson v. Minnesota Power & Light Co. 206 Minn. 268 , , is also distinguishable since the danger of physical contact with unobscured electrical wires is far more apparent than the danger of the invisible weight distribution of a wooden crate of this size and weight.
Hippe v. Duluth Brewing & Malting Co. 59 N.W.2d 665 Minn. 1953
Hippe v. Duluth Brewing & Malting Co. 59 N.W.2d 665 Minn. 1953
6 Beery v. Northern States Power Co. 239 Minn. 48 , 57 N. W. (2d) 838 ; Peterson v. Minnesota Power & Light Co. 206 Minn. 268 , .
Beery v. Northern States Power Co. 57 N.W.2d 838 Minn. 1953
Beery v. Northern States Power Co. 57 N.W.2d 838 Minn. 1953
Peterson v. Minnesota Power & Light Co. 206 Minn. 268 , , and authorities cited therein; see, Restatement, Torts, § 290(a), comment d; 18 Am.
TePoel v. Larson 53 N.W.2d 468 Minn. 1952
TePoel v. Larson 53 N.W.2d 468 Minn. 1952
Ralston v. Tomlinson, 207 Minn. 485 , ; Peterson v. Minnesota Power & Light Co. 206 Minn. 268 , .
Ammundson v. Falk 36 N.W.2d 521 Minn. 1949
Ammundson v. Falk 36 N.W.2d 521 Minn. 1949
See, Ralston v. Tomlinson, 207 Minn. 485 , ; Peterson v. Minnesota Power & Light Co. 206 Minn. 268 , .
Ralston v. Tomlinson 292 N.W. 24 Minn. 1940
Ralston v. Tomlinson 292 N.W. 24 Minn. 1940
As mentioned in Peterson v. Minnesota Power & Light Co. 206 Minn. 268 , , it is difficult to understand how this so-called presumption can aid the plaintiff since the burden of proof on the issue of contributory negligence is with defendant.