Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Donea v. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co., 19 N.W.2d 377.

27 citing documents.

In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: J. A. K. and J. M. S., Parents. Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Texas Commerce Bank v. Olson 416 N.W.2d 456 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Texas Commerce Bank v. Olson 416 N.W.2d 456 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Donea v. Massachusetts Mutual Life Insurance Co., 220 Minn. 204, 213
Hartman v. Blanding's Inc. 181 N.W.2d 466 Minn. 1970
Hartman v. Blanding's Inc. 181 N.W.2d 466 Minn. 1970
Co. 220 Minn. 204, 212 , 19 N. W. (2d) 377, 382 .
Danielson v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance 98 N.W.2d 72 Minn. 1959
Danielson v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance 98 N.W.2d 72 Minn. 1959
Co. 220 Minn. 204 , 19 N. W. (2d) 377 ; Erd v. City of St.
State v. EAH 75 N.W.2d 195 Minn. 1956
State v. E. A. H. 75 N.W.2d 195 Minn. 1956
State v. EAH 75 N.W.2d 195 Minn. 1956
Co. 220 Minn. 204, 216 , 19 N.W.
State v. E. A. H. 75 N.W.2d 195 Minn. 1956
Co. 220 Minn. 204, 216 , 19 N. W. (2d) 377, 384 ; Peterson v. Skarp, 117 Minn. 102 , .
TePoel v. Larson 53 N.W.2d 468 Minn. 1952
TePoel v. Larson 53 N.W.2d 468 Minn. 1952
Co. 220 Minn. 204, 215 , 19 N. W. (2d) 377, 383 , we held that “Prejudice does not result merely because a presumption is referred to,” and that defendant should have made a request to the trial court at the time to instruct the jury that it should not consider the presumption; that because of defendant’s failure to do so it was in no
Shell Oil Co. v. Kapler 50 N.W.2d 707 Minn. 1951
Shell Oil Co. v. Kapler 50 N.W.2d 707 Minn. 1951
Co. 220 Minn. 204 , 19 N. W. (2d) 377 ; Koenigs v. Thome, 226 Minn. 14 , 31 N. W. (2d) 534 ; Ammundson v. Falk, 228 Minn. 115 , 36 N. W. (2d) 521 , 7 A. L. R. (2d) 1318; Del Vecchio v. Bowers, 296 U. S. 280 , 56 S. Ct. 190 , 80 L. ed. 229; Am.
Alstad v. Boyer 37 N.W.2d 372 Minn. 1949
Alstad v. Boyer 37 N.W.2d 372 Minn. 1949
Co. 220 Minn. 204 , 19 N. W. (2d) 377 .
Ammundson v. Falk 36 N.W.2d 521 Minn. 1949
Ammundson v. Falk 36 N.W.2d 521 Minn. 1949
Co. 220 Minn. 204, 213 , 19 N. W. (2d) 377 , 383: “* * * Where there is evidence justifying a finding contrary to the presumed fact, the judge should say nothing about the presumption, since it is then out of the case, and should leave it to the jury to find the existence or nonexistence of the presumed fact upon all the evidence exact
Dozier v. Krmpotich 35 N.W.2d 696 Minn. 1949
Dozier v. Krmpotich 35 N.W.2d 696 Minn. 1949
Co. 220 Minn. 204 , 19 N. W. (2d) 377 .
Storey v. Weinberg 31 N.W.2d 912 Minn. 1948
Storey v. Weinberg 31 N.W.2d 912 Minn. 1948
Co. 220 Minn. 204, 215 , 19 N. W. (2d) 377, 383 .
Koenigs v. Thome 31 N.W.2d 534 Minn. 1948
Koenigs v. Thome 31 N.W.2d 534 Minn. 1948
Co. 220 Minn. 204, 212 , 19 N. W. (2d) 377, 382 ; Swanson v. Swanson, 196 Minn. 298 , .
Jenkins v. Jenkins 19 N.W.2d 389 Minn. 1945
Jenkins v. Jenkins 19 N.W.2d 389 Minn. 1945
Co. 220 Minn. 204 , 19 N. W. (2d) 377 .