Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Breimhorst v. Beckman, 35 N.W.2d 719.

134 citing documents.

Deangelo Profit, Minn. 2023
See Breimhorst v. Beckman , (defining the state of mind necessary to take an action outside the workers’ compensation statute as “ conscious and deliberate intent” to inflict injury).
Daniel v. City of Minneapolis 923 N.W.2d 637 Minn. 2019
Roller-Dick v. Centracare Health Sys. 916 N.W.2d 373 Minn. 2018
Roller-Dick v. Centracare Health Sys. 916 N.W.2d 373 Minn. 2018
Minn. Stat. § 176.001 (2016) ; see also Breimhorst v. Beckman , 227 Minn. 409 , , 732 (1949) ("The law contemplates a reciprocal yielding and giving up of rights existing at common law for the new and enlarged rights and remedies given by the compensation act.").
State of Minnesota, Respondent/Cross-Appellant v. Bonnie Ann Lindquist, Appellant/Cross-Respondent. 869 N.W.2d 863 Minn. 2015
Darrel Schmitz v. United States Steel Corporation 852 N.W.2d 669 Minn. 2014
Darrel Schmitz v. United States Steel Corporation 852 N.W.2d 669 Minn. 2014
Dykhoff v. Xcel Energy 840 N.W.2d 821 Minn. 2013
Dykhoff v. Xcel Energy 840 N.W.2d 821 Minn. 2013
te cause tort standard is not the test, our precedent requires that Dykhoff show that her employment was "the predominant factor in peculiarly exposing [her]-in a different manner and in a greater degree than if [she] had been pursuing [her] ordinary personal affairs-to a hazard,” and that hazard "may or may not be peculiar to or exclusively associated with the employment.” Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 421-22
Schmitz v. United States Steel Corp. 831 N.W.2d 656 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Schmitz v. United States Steel Corp. 831 N.W.2d 656 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
First, the district court relied upon Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 433-34 , for the proposition that where new rights or remedies are created that, were unknown at common law, “the giving or withholding of a jury trial is a legislative privilege,” and therefore absent a legislative decree grant *680 ing the right to a jury trial, a statutorily created caus
Riley v. Jankowski 713 N.W.2d 379 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Riley v. Jankowski 713 N.W.2d 379 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
In Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409 , which involved an action brought by an injured employee against her employer, the supreme court considered whether the legislature’s delegation of quasi-judicial powers to the industrial commission, an administrative body, violated article III, section 1, of the state constitution.
Meintsma v. Loram Maintenance of Way, Inc. 684 N.W.2d 434 Minn. 2004
Meintsma v. Loram Maintenance of Way, Inc. 684 N.W.2d 434 Minn. 2004
Gunderson, d at 703 ; -45 (Minn.1987); Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 425-26
Kline v. Berg Drywall, Inc. 685 N.W.2d 12 Minn. 2004
Kline v. Berg Drywall, Inc. 685 N.W.2d 12 Minn. 2004
Gradjelick v. Hance 646 N.W.2d 225 Minn. 2002
Gradjelick v. Hance 646 N.W.2d 225 Minn. 2002
See, e.g., Johnson v. O’Brien, 258 Minn. 502, 504-06 , -47 (1960); Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 417
Abraham v. County of Hennepin 639 N.W.2d 342 Minn. 2002
Abraham v. County of Hennepin 639 N.W.2d 342 Minn. 2002
Our analysis is not altered by our decisions in Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409
Alcozer v. North Country Food Bank 635 N.W.2d 695 Minn. 2001
Alcozer v. North Country Food Bank 635 N.W.2d 695 Minn. 2001
15 In Breimhorst v. Beckman, we recognized that the guaranty of a certain remedy in the law refers to general fundamental principles of justice and that the court must grant the legislature “wide latitude” to address public needs through legislation and determine “both the form and the measure of the remedy for a wrong.” 227 Minn. 409, 435 , (citation omitted).
Gunderson v. Harrington 632 N.W.2d 695 Minn. 2001
Gunderson v. Harrington 632 N.W.2d 695 Minn. 2001
In Breimhorst v. Beckman, we rejected a claim under the intentional injury exception where the employee failed to present a triable issue of fact regarding whether the employer had “conscious and deliberate intent directed to the purpose of inflicting an injury, and such intent may not be inferred from mere negligence, though it be gross.” 227 Minn. 409, 426 , (holding that the exclusive remedy for employee’s injury from concealed spring gun on employer’s premises was under the WCA).
Abraham v. County of Hennepin 622 N.W.2d 121 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Abraham v. County of Hennepin 622 N.W.2d 121 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 433
Irwin v. Surdyk's Liquor 599 N.W.2d 132 Minn. 1999
Irwin v. Surdyk's Liquor 599 N.W.2d 132 Minn. 1999
See, e.g., Mack, d at 752-53 ; cf. Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 432 , -34 (1949) (upholding quasi-judicial powers of industrial commission).
Marriage of Holmberg v. Holmberg 588 N.W.2d 720 Minn. 1999
Marriage of Holmberg v. Holmberg 588 N.W.2d 720 Minn. 1999
Silva v. Maplewood Care Center 582 N.W.2d 566 Minn. 1998
Marriage of Holmberg v. Holmberg 578 N.W.2d 817 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Marriage of Holmberg v. Holmberg 578 N.W.2d 817 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
In Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 432-33 , -34 (1949), the court held that the workers’ compensation system did not violate separation of powers.
Arrowhead Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. LTV Steel Mining Co. 568 N.W.2d 875 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Arrowhead Electric Cooperative, Inc. v. LTV Steel Mining Co. 568 N.W.2d 875 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
See Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 417 , (lessor has duty to disclose concealed, dangerous conditions of which he has knowledge).
State Department of Labor & Industry Ex Rel. Special Compensation Fund v. Wintz Parcel Drivers, Inc. 555 N.W.2d 908 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
State Department of Labor & Industry Ex Rel. Special Compensation Fund v. Wintz Parcel Drivers, Inc. 555 N.W.2d 908 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
See Haymes, d at 259 (stating that in absence of statute or appellate rule granting right of discretionary review of quasi-judicial agency decision, certiorari review is appropriate); cf. Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 433 , (upholding delegation of adjudicatory powers to administrative agency despite separation-of-powers challenge where finality of agency’s decision was subordinate to certiorari review by appellate court).
Meath v. Harmful Substance Compensation Board 550 N.W.2d 275 Minn. 1996
Meath v. Harmful Substance Compensation Board 550 N.W.2d 275 Minn. 1996
Despite our recognition of this elementary rule of legal writing, we are constrained by the discussion in the special concurrence of Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409 , to attempt to correct what appears to be a misunderstanding of the statutory background of the Breimhorst opinion.
National Hydro Systems v. M.A. Mortenson Co. 529 N.W.2d 690 Minn. 1995
Tyroll v. Private Label Chemicals, Inc. 505 N.W.2d 54 Minn. 1993
Tyroll v. Private Label Chemicals, Inc. 505 N.W.2d 54 Minn. 1993
Breimhorst v. Beckman, 221 Minn. 409, 433, Morton Brick & Tile Co. v. Sodergren, 130 Minn. 252, 254 , 153 N.W.
Tyroll v. Private Label Chemicals, Inc. 493 N.W.2d 128 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Tyroll v. Private Label Chemicals, Inc. 493 N.W.2d 128 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
“The term ‘all eases at law’ refers to common-law actions as distinguished from causes in equity and certain other proceedings.” Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 433
Snesrud v. Instant Web, Inc. 484 N.W.2d 423 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Snesrud v. Instant Web, Inc. 484 N.W.2d 423 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 434
Schweich v. Ziegler, Inc. 463 N.W.2d 722 Minn. 1990
Schweich v. Ziegler, Inc. 463 N.W.2d 722 Minn. 1990
53 , 59) (1861), this court has held the clause allows abrogation of common-law rights when replaced by a reasonable substitute, see Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 435-36 , -36 (1949), or when the legislature pursues a permissible legislative objective.
Flaherty v. Lindsay 457 N.W.2d 771 Minn. Ct. App. 1990