DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Cofran v. Swanman, 29 N.W.2d 448.

67 citing documents.

  • Rudd v. Lyceum Dramatic Productions, Inc. 85 N.W.2d 61 Minn. 1957
    12 Schrader v. Kriesel, 232 Minn. 238 , 45 N. W. (2d) 395 ; Cofran v. Swanman, 225 Minn. 40, 43 , 29 N. W. (2d) 448, 450 ; 1 Dunnell, Dig.
  • McMillen v. Meyer 74 N.W.2d 393 Minn. 1956
  • McMillen v. Meyer 74 N.W.2d 393 Minn. 1956
    6 See, Cofran v. Swanman, 225 Minn. 40 , 29 N. W. (2d) 448 ; Katlaba v. Pfeifer, 238 Minn. 298 , 56 N. W. (2d) 725 ; Bauer v. Miller Motor Co. 197 Minn. 352 , ; Cosgrove v. McGonagle, 196 Minn. 6 , ; Lamp v. Pennsylvania R. Co. 305 Pa.
  • Mayzlik v. Lansing Elevator Co. 63 N.W.2d 380 Minn. 1954
  • Mayzlik v. Lansing Elevator Co. 63 N.W.2d 380 Minn. 1954
    Austin v. Rosecke, 240 Minn. 321 , 61 N. W. (2d) 240 ; Cofran v. Swanman, 225 Minn. 40 , 29 N. W. (2d) 448 ; Kundiger v. Metropolitan L. Ins.
  • Sundeen v. Barthel 63 N.W.2d 267 Minn. 1954
  • Sundeen v. Barthel 63 N.W.2d 267 Minn. 1954
    Cofran v. Swanman, 225 Minn. 40 , 29 N. W. (2d) 448 ; Sanders v. Gilbertson, 224 Minn. 546 , 29 N. W. (2d) 357 ; Norling v. Stempf, 208 Minn. 143 , .
  • Austin v. Rosecke 61 N.W.2d 240 Minn. 1953
  • Austin v. Rosecke 61 N.W.2d 240 Minn. 1953
    Cofran v. Swanman, 225 Minn. 40 , 29 N. W. (2d) 448 ; Kundiger v. Metropolitan L. Ins.
  • Price v. Mackner 58 N.W.2d 260 Minn. 1953
  • Price v. Mackner 58 N.W.2d 260 Minn. 1953
    Cofran v. Swanman, 225 Minn. 40 , 29 N. W. (2d) 448 ; Brulla v. Cassady, 206 Minn. 398 , .
  • Katlaba v. Pfeifer 56 N.W.2d 725 Minn. 1953
  • Katlaba v. Pfeifer 56 N.W.2d 725 Minn. 1953
    3 Cofran v. Swanman, 225 Minn. 40 , 29 N. W. (2d) 448 ; Cosgrove v. McGonagle, 196 Minn. 6 , ; E. C. Vogt, Inc. v. Ganley Brothers Co. 185 Minn. 442 , ; 6 Dunnell, Dig.
  • LaCombe v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 51 N.W.2d 836 Minn. 1952
  • LaCombe v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 51 N.W.2d 836 Minn. 1952
    Johnson v. Evanski, 221 Minn. 323 , 22 N. W. (2d) 213 ; Cofran v. Swanman, 225 Minn. 40 , 29 N. W. (2d) 448 ; Brulla v. Cassady, 206 Minn. 398 , ; Mardorf v. Duluth-Superior Transit Co. 194 Minn. 537 , ; 3 Dunnell, Dig.
  • Sorlie v. Thomas 51 N.W.2d 592 Minn. 1952
  • Sorlie v. Thomas 51 N.W.2d 592 Minn. 1952
    The rule ordinarily applicable to test a verdict on motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict is well stated in Cofran v. Swanman, 225 Minn. 40, 42 , 29 N. W. (2d) 448 , 450: “A motion for judgment non obstante accepts the view of the evidence most favorable to the verdict and admits every inference reasonably to be drawn from such evidence, as well as the credibility of the testimony for the adverse party, and if the application of this rule, in the light of