Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Hubenette v. Ostby, 6 N.W.2d 637.

42 citing documents.

  • opc7021302-040103.pdf Minn. Ct. App. 2023
  • opc7021302-040103.pdf Minn. Ct. App. 2023
    See Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349, 349-53, -39 (1942).
  • Poppler v. Wright Hennepin Cooperative Electric Ass'n 834 N.W.2d 527 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
  • Poppler v. Wright Hennepin Cooperative Electric Ass'n 834 N.W.2d 527 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
    at 246 (citing Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349, 349-53 , -39 (1942)).
  • Stelter v. Chiquita Processed Foods, L.L.C. 658 N.W.2d 242 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
  • Stelter v. Chiquita Processed Foods, L.L.C. 658 N.W.2d 242 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
    See Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349, 349-53 , -39 (1942).
  • Stenzel v. Bach 203 N.W.2d 819 Minn. 1973
  • Stenzel v. Bach 203 N.W.2d 819 Minn. 1973
    Tatro v. Carlson, 271 Minn. 536 , Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349
  • Springrose v. Willmore 192 N.W.2d 826 Minn. 1971
  • Springrose v. Willmore 192 N.W.2d 826 Minn. 1971
    This marks, as in the case at bar, merely a return to the earlier expression of Mr. Chief Justice Henry M. Gallagher in Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349, 351 , that “[s]uch assumption of risk is but a phase of contributory negligence.” We had an opportunity in Parness v. Economics Laboratory, Inc. 284 Minn. 381 , to follow the lead of Meistrich in abolishing assumption of risk as a separate and distinct defense.
  • Parness v. Economics Laboratory, Inc. 170 N.W.2d 554 Minn. 1969
  • Parness v. Economics Laboratory, Inc. 170 N.W.2d 554 Minn. 1969
    See, also, Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349 , 6 N. W. (2d) 637 .
  • Muckler v. Buchl 150 N.W.2d 689 Minn. 1967
  • Muckler v. Buchl 150 N.W.2d 689 Minn. 1967
    7 See, Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349 , 6 N. W. (2d) 637 ; Johnson v. Evanski, 221 Minn. 323 , 22 N. W. (2d) 213 ; Grabow v. Hanson, 226 Minn. 265 , 32 N. W. (2d) 593 ; Schrader v. Kriesel, 232 Minn. 238 , 45 N. W. (2d) 395 ; Standafer v. First Nat.
  • Spafford v. Hahn 143 N.W.2d 81 Minn. 1966
  • Spafford v. Hahn 143 N.W.2d 81 Minn. 1966
    As said in Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349, 350 , 6 N. W. (2d) 637 , 638: “ ‘In the ordinary personal injury action, where plaintiff puts himself in a position to encounter known hazards which the ordinarily prudent person would not do, he assumes the risk of injury therefrom.
  • Tatro v. Carlson 137 N.W.2d 187 Minn. 1965
  • Tatro v. Carlson 137 N.W.2d 187 Minn. 1965
    In Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349 , 6 N. W. (2d) 637 , defendant Ostby had during the day persistently driven at speeds as high as 75 or 80 miles per hour over repeated protests by plaintiffs, who sought damages for injuries suffered in a collision between Ostby’s automobile, in which they were riding, and one operated by another defendant.
  • Rahja v. Current 119 N.W.2d 699 Minn. 1963
  • Rahja v. Current 119 N.W.2d 699 Minn. 1963
    2 Rutz v. Iacono, 229 Minn. 591 , 40 N. W. (2d) 892 ; Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349 , 6 N. W. (2d) 637 .
  • Sackett v. Haeckel 81 N.W.2d 833 Minn. 1957
  • Sackett v. Haeckel 81 N.W.2d 833 Minn. 1957
    The case of Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349 , 6 N. W. (2d) 637 , is cited by the Schafer estate.
  • Mayzlik v. Lansing Elevator Co. 63 N.W.2d 380 Minn. 1954
  • Mayzlik v. Lansing Elevator Co. 63 N.W.2d 380 Minn. 1954
    Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349 , 6 N. W. (2d) 637 .
  • Swenson v. Slawik 53 N.W.2d 107 Minn. 1952
  • Swenson v. Slawik 53 N.W.2d 107 Minn. 1952
    Schrader v. Kriesel, 232 Minn. 238 , 45 N. W. (2d) 395 ; Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349 , 6 N. W. (2d) 637 .
  • Schrader v. Kriesel 45 N.W.2d 395 Minn. 1950
  • Schrader v. Kriesel 45 N.W.2d 395 Minn. 1950
    In the case of Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349, 350 , 6 N. W. (2d) 637, 638 , this court held that— "where plaintiff puts himself in a position to encounter known hazards which the ordinarily prudent person would not do, he assumes the risk of injury therefrom.
  • Grabow v. Hanson 32 N.W.2d 593 Minn. 1948
  • Grabow v. Hanson 32 N.W.2d 593 Minn. 1948
    See, also, Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349 , 6 N. W. (2d) 637 ; Schroepfer v. City of Sleepy Eye, 215 Minn. 525 , 10 N. W. (2d) 398 ; Mosheuvel v. District of Columbia, 191 U. S. 247 , 24 S. Ct. 57 , 48 L. ed. 170; H. E. & W. T. Ry.
  • Kapla v. Lehti 30 N.W.2d 685 Minn. 1948
  • Kapla v. Lehti 30 N.W.2d 685 Minn. 1948
    *333 Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349 , 6 N. W. (2d) 637 , and Farnham v. Pepper, 193 Minn. 222 , , cited by appellant, are not in point.
  • Kordiak v. Holmgren 30 N.W.2d 16 Minn. 1947
  • Kordiak v. Holmgren 30 N.W.2d 16 Minn. 1947
    A ‘correct statement is that the plaintiff’s negligence, to prevent a recovery, must contribute proximately to the injury as a cause.’ * * * The question is not as to the amount of a plaintiff’s negligence, if any, but whether, if present at all, it contributed as a cause proximately to the result.” Defendants rely upon Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349 , 6 N. W. (2d) 637 .
  • Johnson v. Evanski 22 N.W.2d 213 Minn. 1946
  • Johnson v. Evanski 22 N.W.2d 213 Minn. 1946
    In Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349, 350 , 6 N. W. (2d) 637, 638 , we said: “In the ordinary personal injury action, where plaintiff puts himself in a position to encounter known hazards which the ordinarily prudent person would not do, he assumes the risk of injury therefrom.
  • Landru v. Stensrud 17 N.W.2d 322 Minn. 1945
  • Landru v. Stensrud 17 N.W.2d 322 Minn. 1945
    As said in Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349, 350 , 6 N. W. (2d) 637 , 638: “In the ordinary personal injury action, where plaintiff puts himself in a position to encounter known hazards which the ordinarily prudent person would not do, he assumes the risk of injury therefrom.
  • Wilson v. Davidson 17 N.W.2d 31 Minn. 1944
  • Wilson v. Davidson 17 N.W.2d 31 Minn. 1944
    Hu-benette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349 , 6 N. W. (2d) 637 .
  • Schroepfer v. City of Sleepy Eye 10 N.W.2d 398 Minn. 1943
  • Schroepfer v. City of Sleepy Eye 10 N.W.2d 398 Minn. 1943
    In this the trial court was of the opinion expressed by us recently in Hubenette v. Ostby, 213 Minn. 349, 350 , 6 N. W. (2d) 637, 638 , where we said: “In the ordinary personal injury action, where plaintiff puts himself in a position to encounter known hazards which the ordinarily prudent person would not do, he assumes the risk of injury therefrom.