Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Cashman v. Hedberg, 10 N.W.2d 388.

37 citing documents.

Shaira Mattingly v. American Family Insurance, Kathleen Plasch 6 N.W.3d 787 Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Shaira Mattingly v. American Family Insurance, Kathleen Plasch 6 N.W.3d 787 Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Dahlin v. Kroening 796 N.W.2d 503 Minn. 2011
Dahlin v. Kroening 796 N.W.2d 503 Minn. 2011
but rather in what the legislature intended in adopting the statutes” (citing Cashman v. Hedberg, 215 Minn. 463, 467-72 , -93 (1943))); Koes v. Advanced Design, Inc., -60 (Minn.App.2001) (reasoning that, despite public policy arguments supporting the application of a limitations period, no statute of limitations applied to the cause of action because the statute did not expressly state an ap
Tezak v. Bachke 698 N.W.2d 37 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Whitener Ex Rel. Miller v. Dahl 625 N.W.2d 827 Minn. 2001
Whitener Ex Rel. Miller v. Dahl 625 N.W.2d 827 Minn. 2001
The court cited Cashman v. Hedberg, 215 Minn. 463, 467 , where we first observed that a cause of action for wrongful death was not recognized at common law and that compliance with the conditions imposed by the statute creating the cause of action relate to the right to bring suit in the first instance, not the remedy.
Whitener v. Dahl 612 N.W.2d 188 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Whitener v. Dahl 612 N.W.2d 188 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Cashman v. Hedberg, 215 Minn. 463, 467 , Rugland, 30 Minn. at 386 , 15 N.W.
Ortiz Ex Rel. Ortiz v. Gavenda 590 N.W.2d 119 Minn. 1999
Ortiz Ex Rel. Ortiz v. Gavenda 590 N.W.2d 119 Minn. 1999
See Fussner v. Andert, 261 Minn. 347, 350-53 , -58 (1961); Cashman v. Hedberg, 215 Minn. 463, 466
Ortiz v. Gavenda 574 N.W.2d 764 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Ortiz v. Gavenda 574 N.W.2d 764 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Beck v. Groe, 245 Minn. 28, 34 , Cashman v. Hedberg, 215 Minn. 463, 465 , Rugland v. Anderson, 30 Minn. 386, 386 , 15 N.W.
Nachtsheim v. Wartnick 411 N.W.2d 882 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Nachtsheim v. Wartnick 411 N.W.2d 882 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Regie De L'Assurance Automobile Du Quebec v. Jensen 399 N.W.2d 85 Minn. 1987
Regie De L'Assurance Automobile Du Quebec v. Jensen 399 N.W.2d 85 Minn. 1987
See, e.g., Cashman v. Hedberg, 215 Minn. 463, 473 , Rugland v. Anderson, 30 Minn. 386 , 15 N.W.
DeRogatis Ex Rel. DeRogatis v. Mayo Clinic 390 N.W.2d 773 Minn. 1986
DeRogatis Ex Rel. DeRogatis v. Mayo Clinic 390 N.W.2d 773 Minn. 1986
Similarly, in Cashman v. Hedberg, 215 Minn. 463 , this court concluded that the limitation period could not be extended by the tolling provisions of the statute of limitations relating to actions by administrators and confirmed the 2-year limitation without regard to the date letters of administration were granted.
Bonhiver v. Fugelso, Porter, Simich & Whiteman, Inc. 355 N.W.2d 138 Minn. 1984
Bonhiver v. Fugelso, Porter, Simich & Whiteman, Inc. 355 N.W.2d 138 Minn. 1984
See, e.g., Witthuhn v. Durbahn, 279 Minn. 437 , (strict construction of 2-year limitation); Berghuis v. Korthuis, 228 Minn. 534 , (meeting requirements of limitation period is a condition precedent to bringing suit); Cashman v. Hedberg, 215 Minn. 463 , (limitation period is a condition precedent to wrongful death suit); Rugland v. Anderson, 30 Minn. 386 , 15 N.W.
DeCosse v. Armstrong Cork Co. 319 N.W.2d 45 Minn. 1982
DeCosse v. Armstrong Cork Co. 319 N.W.2d 45 Minn. 1982
See, e.g., Berghuis v. Korthuis, 228 Minn. 534 , Cashman v. Hedberg, 215 Minn. 463 , Rugland v. Anderson, 30 Minn. 386 , 15 N.W.
Stawikowski v. Collins Electric Construction Co. 289 N.W.2d 390 Minn. 1979
Stawikowski v. Collins Electric Construction Co. 289 N.W.2d 390 Minn. 1979
Western Union Telegraph Co. v. Spaeth, 232 Minn. 128 , Cashman v. Hedberg, 215 Minn. 463 , 1A Sands, Sutherland Statutory Construction (4 ed.) § 22.33.
Morton v. Board of Com'rs of Ramsey County 223 N.W.2d 764 Minn. 1974
Morton v. Board of Com'rs of Ramsey County 223 N.W.2d 764 Minn. 1974
Having considered the subject matter, the language of the statute itself, the importance of its provisions, the object intended, and the apparent legislative intent, see Cashman v. Hedberg, 215 Minn. 463 , we are of the opinion that, in so far as the special provisions of c. 581 and the general rules of Minn. St.
State v. Dehler 115 N.W.2d 358 Minn. 1962
State v. Dehler 115 N.W.2d 358 Minn. 1962
Cashman v. Hedberg, 215 Minn. 463 , 10 N. W. (2d) 388 ; State ex rel.
Shumway v. Nelson 107 N.W.2d 531 Minn. 1961
Shumway v. Nelson 107 N.W.2d 531 Minn. 1961
10 Cashman v. Hedberg, 215 Minn. 463 , 10 N. W. (2d) 388 ; Keiper v. Anderson, 138 Minn. 392 , , L. R. A. 1918C, 299.
State v. Jones 48 N.W.2d 662 Minn. 1951
State v. Jones 48 N.W.2d 662 Minn. 1951
Cashman v. Hedberg, 215 Minn. 463, 472 , 10 N. W. (2d) 388, 393 .
Berghuis v. Korthuis 37 N.W.2d 809 Minn. 1949
Berghuis v. Korthuis 37 N.W.2d 809 Minn. 1949
150; Bond v. Pennsylvania R. Co. 124 Minn. 195 , ; In re Estate of Daniel, 208 Minn. 420 , ; Cashman v. Hedberg, 215 Minn. 463 , 10 N. W. (2d) 388 ; see, also, 16 Am.
Foley v. Western Alloyed Steel Casting Co. 18 N.W.2d 541 Minn. 1945
Foley v. Western Alloyed Steel Casting Co. 18 N.W.2d 541 Minn. 1945
Cashman v. Hedberg, 215 Minn. 463 , 10 N. W. (2d) 388 .

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by