Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 36 N.W.2d 810.

43 citing documents.

Inquiry into the Conduct of the Honorable John P. Dehen Minn. 2025
Inquiry into the Conduct of the Honorable John P. Dehen Minn. 2025
Likewise, Minnesota appellate decisions provide that a “judge should not try a case, even in the absence of bias, if circumstances have arisen which give a bona fide appearance of bias.” (“A litigant, though mistaken in fact, may conceivably assert with sincerity that he has good reason to believe, and does believe, that a judge is biased, and when he so believes his cause should be heard before another judge, if for no other reason than that confidence in the impartial administra
Rochester City Lines Co. v. City of Rochester 913 N.W.2d 443 Minn. 2018
Rochester City Lines Co. v. City of Rochester 913 N.W.2d 443 Minn. 2018
Taxes ), , 206 (Minn. 1995) (acknowledging possibility that decision-maker could appear biased without actually being biased); State v. Moss , , 734-35 (Minn. 1978) (limiting a defendant who untimely raised allegations that a district court judge was biased to presenting evidence of actual bias, rather than just appearance of bias); Wiedemann v. Wiedemann , 228 Minn. 174 , , 812 (1949) (noting that a judge could be disqualified for appearance of bias even where no bias-in-fact existed).
State v. Azure 621 N.W.2d 721 Minn. 2001
State v. Azure 621 N.W.2d 721 Minn. 2001
Appellant cites Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174, 179 , to support the proposition that an imperfect filing will not necessarily defeat a party’s right of removal.
State v. American Fundamentalist Church 530 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 1995
In Re Collection of Delinquent Real Prop. Taxes 530 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 1995
State v. American Fundamentalist Church 530 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 1995
Wiede- *207 mann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174 , see also Payne v. Lee, 222 Minn. 269
In Re Collection of Delinquent Real Prop. Taxes 530 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 1995
Wiedemann *207 v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174 , see also Payne v. Lee, 222 Minn. 269
Omaha Financial Life Insurance Co. v. Continental Life Underwriters, Insurance Co. 427 N.W.2d 290 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Omaha Financial Life Insurance Co. v. Continental Life Underwriters, Insurance Co. 427 N.W.2d 290 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174 , (district's general rule that motions to modify be referred to original trial judge is inapplicable where party timely filed affidavit to obtain removal).
Violette v. Midwest Printing Co.-Webb Publishing 415 N.W.2d 318 Minn. 1987
Violette v. Midwest Printing Co.-Webb Publishing 415 N.W.2d 318 Minn. 1987
Jones v. Jones, 242 Minn. 251, 262 , Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174, 177 , 36 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
See Payne v. Lee, 222 Minn. 269 , Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174
Marriage of Olson v. Olson 392 N.W.2d 338 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Marriage of Olson v. Olson 392 N.W.2d 338 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174
McClelland v. Pierce 376 N.W.2d 217 Minn. 1985
McClelland v. Pierce 376 N.W.2d 217 Minn. 1985
and Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174 , Messrs.
Ellis v. Minneapolis Commission on Civil Rights 295 N.W.2d 523 Minn. 1980
Ellis v. Minneapolis Commission on Civil Rights 295 N.W.2d 523 Minn. 1980
Jones v. Jones, 242 Minn. 251 , Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174 , Payne v. Lee, 222 Minn. 269
Marriage of Lappi v. Lappi 294 N.W.2d 312 Minn. 1980
Marriage of Lappi v. Lappi 294 N.W.2d 312 Minn. 1980
In the case of Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174 , we commented that judges should readily remove themselves.
State v. Valencia 602 P.2d 807 Ariz. 1979
Fassbinder v. Minneapolis Fire Department Relief Ass'n 254 N.W.2d 363 Minn. 1977
Fassbinder v. Minneapolis Fire Department Relief Ass'n 254 N.W.2d 363 Minn. 1977
And in Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174 , we stated that even if a judge was free from bias in fact, the bona fide appearance of bias to the litigants would require that another judge hear the case.
Minnesota State Bar Ass'n v. Divorce Education Associates 219 N.W.2d 920 Minn. 1974
Minnesota State Bar Ass'n v. Divorce Education Associates 219 N.W.2d 920 Minn. 1974
See, e.g., Payne v. *325 Lee, 222 Minn. 269 , Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174 , Jones v. Jones, 242 Minn. 251
State v. Kraska 201 N.W.2d 742 Minn. 1972
State v. Kraska 201 N.W.2d 742 Minn. 1972
Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174
Lindberg v. Lindberg 163 N.W.2d 870 Minn. 1969
Lindberg v. Lindberg 163 N.W.2d 870 Minn. 1969
See, Anderson v. Anderson, 260 Minn. 573 , 110 N. W. (2d) 293 ; Jones v. Jones, 242 Minn. 251 , 64 N. W. (2d) 508 ; Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174 , 36 N. W. (2d) 810 .
In Re Trusts Created by Hormel 163 N.W.2d 844 Minn. 1968
In Re Trusts Created by Hormel 163 N.W.2d 844 Minn. 1968
Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174 , *204 178, 36 N. W. (2d) 810, 813 .
Anderson v. Anderson 110 N.W.2d 293 Minn. 1961
Anderson v. Anderson 110 N.W.2d 293 Minn. 1961
We are of the opinion that this issue is governed by our decisions in Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174 , 36 N. W. (2d) 810 ; Jones v. Jones, 242 Minn. 251 , 64 N. W. (2d) 508 ; and that thereunder it was incumbent upon the judge involved to recognize the affidavit of prejudice which was filed against him, to refrain from acting on the motion, and to refer the case to the clerk of the district court so that the cause mi
Baskerville v. Baskerville 75 N.W.2d 762 Minn. 1956
Baskerville v. Baskerville 75 N.W.2d 762 Minn. 1956
4 See, Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174 , 36 N. W. (2d) 810 .
State v. Ketterer 69 N.W.2d 115 Minn. 1955
State v. Ketterer 69 N.W.2d 115 Minn. 1955
Payne v. Lee, 222 Minn. 269 , 24 N. W. (2d) 259 ; Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174 , 86 N. W. (2d) 810 ; Jones v. Jones, 242 Minn. 251 , 64 N. W. (2d) 508 .
Jones v. Jones 64 N.W.2d 508 Minn. 1954
Jones v. Jones 64 N.W.2d 508 Minn. 1954
4 While some of the earlier cases 5 indicate that a strict construction was given to the statute, in the recent case of Wiedemann v. Wiedemann, 228 Minn. 174, 178 , 36 N. W. (2d) 810, 813 , this court held that the “statute [now embodied in the rule] governing the disqualification of a judge for bias * * * is to bé given a liberal construction to avoid a sacrifice of that right on the altar of technicality.” (Italics supplied.)