DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

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

134 citing documents.

  • Rognrud v. Zubert 165 N.W.2d 244 Minn. 1969
    E. g., Indianhead Truck Line, Inc. v. Hvidsten Transport, Inc. 268 Minn. 176 , 128 N. W. (2d) 334 ; *434 Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409 , 35 N. W. (2d) 719 ; Morton Brick & Tile Co. v. Sodergren, 130 Minn. 252 , ; Whallon v. Bancroft, 4 Minn. 70 (109).
  • Snyder v. General Paper Corporation 152 N.W.2d 743 Minn. 1967
  • Snyder v. General Paper Corporation 152 N.W.2d 743 Minn. 1967
    Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409 , 35 N. W. (2d) 719 ; Olson v. Trinity Lodge, 226 Minn. 141 , 32 N. W. (2d) 255 .
  • Sandstrom v. AAD Temple Building Assn. Inc. 127 N.W.2d 173 Minn. 1964
  • Sandstrom v. AAD Temple Building Assn. Inc. 127 N.W.2d 173 Minn. 1964
    4 It is not within the scope of this opinion to consider th'e many facets of the liability of the owner or possessor of land, including that of the landlord to the tenant or his invitee, Johnson v. O’Brien, 258 Minn. 502 , 105 N. W. (2d) 244 , 88 A. L. R. (2d) 577; Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409 , 35 N. W. (2d) 719 , or the liability of the shopkeeper to the business invitee, Flynn v. Arcade Investment Co. 253 Minn. 107 , 91 N. W. (2d) 113 ; Anderson v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. 223 Minn. 1
  • Landgraf v. Ellsworth 126 N.W.2d 766 Minn. 1964
  • Landgraf v. Ellsworth 126 N.W.2d 766 Minn. 1964
    The right to a jury trial is derived from Minn. Const. art. 1, § 4, which provides: “The right of trial by jury shall remain inviolate, and shall extend to all cases at law without regard to the amount in controversy, * * In construing this constitutional provision in Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 433 , 35 N. W. (2d) 719, 734 , we said: “* * * The term ‘all cases at law’ refers to common-law actions as distinguished from causes in equity and certain other proceedings.
  • Swenson v. Zacher 118 N.W.2d 786 Minn. 1962
  • Swenson v. Zacher 118 N.W.2d 786 Minn. 1962
    Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409 , 35 N. W. (2d) 719 ; Olson v. Trinity Lodge, 226 Minn. 141 , 32 N. W. (2d) 255 ; Caswell’s Case, 305 Mass. 500 ,26 N. E. (2d) 328.
  • Johnson v. O'BRIEN 105 N.W.2d 244 Minn. 1960
  • Johnson v. O'BRIEN 105 N.W.2d 244 Minn. 1960
    o suspect that the danger exists and that the tenant, exercising due care, would not discover it for himself and which conditions are not open to the observation of the tenant then he must at least disclose such information to the tenant or be found lacking in due care.” In the memorandum accompanying its order denying defendants’ motion for a new trial, the court relied on Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 418, 419 , 35 N. W. (2d) 719, 726 , where we stated that the liability of a landlord
  • Gillette v. Harold, Inc. 101 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 1960
  • Gillette v. Harold, Inc. 101 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 1960
    1 See, also, Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409 , 35 N. W. (2d) 719 , and Hiber v. City of St.
  • McCourtie v. United States Steel Corp. 93 N.W.2d 552 Minn. 1958
  • Welsand v. RAILROAD & WAREHOUSE COMMISSION 88 N.W.2d 834 Minn. 1958
  • Welsand v. RAILROAD & WAREHOUSE COMMISSION 88 N.W.2d 834 Minn. 1958
    5 Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 430 , 35 N.W.
  • Corcoran v. PG Corcoran Co. Inc. 71 N.W.2d 787 Minn. 1955
  • Corcoran v. PG Corcoran Co. Inc. 71 N.W.2d 787 Minn. 1955
    Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409 , 35 N. W. (2d) 719 ; Fox v. Swartz, 228 Minn. 233 , 36 N. W. (2d) 708 ; 3 Dunnell, Dig.
  • Standafer v. First National Bank 68 N.W.2d 362 Minn. 1955
  • Standafer v. First National Bank 68 N.W.2d 362 Minn. 1955
    See, Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 417 , 35 N. W. (2d) 719, 726 ; Williams v. Dickson, 122 Minn. 49 , ; Nash v. Minneapolis Mill Co. 24 Minn. 501 , 31 Am.
  • Fairview Hospital Ass'n v. Public Building Service & Hospital & Institutional Employees Union, Local No. 113 64 N.W.2d 16 Minn. 1954
  • Fairview Hospital Ass'n v. Public Building Service & Hospital & Institutional Employees Union, Local No. 113 64 N.W.2d 16 Minn. 1954
    These principles were expressed by this court in Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 430 , 35 N. W. (2d) 719, 732 , as follows: “* * * The objective of its [police power] exercise is the preservation of the public welfare, * * * and the remedy adopted there *539 under must be reasonably designed to accomplish its purpose without going beyond the reasonable demands of the occasion.
  • Crawford v. Woodrich Construction Co. Inc. 57 N.W.2d 648 Minn. 1953
  • Crawford v. Woodrich Construction Co. Inc. 57 N.W.2d 648 Minn. 1953
    2 Voiding v. Harnish, 236 Minn. 71 , 51 N. W. (2d) 658 ; see, Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 421 , 35 N. W. (2d) 719, 728 , for a discussion and application of the term “exposure” as applied to hazards.
  • Weidenbach v. Miller 55 N.W.2d 289 Minn. 1952
  • Weidenbach v. Miller 55 N.W.2d 289 Minn. 1952
    In Olson v. Trinity Lodge, 226 Minn. 141 , 32 N. W. (2d) 255 , we cited with approval Caswell’s Case, 305 Mass. 500 , 26 N. E. (2d) 328, supra; and again in Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 421 , 35 N. W. (2d) 719, 728 , where we applied the same definition, we said: “* * * It is not primarily a question of whether the hazard is peculiar to the employment, but whether the employment is the predominant factor in peculiarly exposing the workman — in a different manner and in a greater degree
  • Frank v. Anderson Bros. 51 N.W.2d 805 Minn. 1952
  • Frank v. Anderson Bros. 51 N.W.2d 805 Minn. 1952
    *83 Our former decision of Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409 , 35 N. W. (2d) 719 , wherein we held that the employe’s sole and exclusive remedy was under the workmen’s. compensation act, is controlling herein.
  • Yeager v. Chapman 45 N.W.2d 776 Minn. 1951
  • Yeager v. Chapman 45 N.W.2d 776 Minn. 1951
    See, Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 421 , 35 N. W. (2d) 719, 728 .
  • Senske v. Fairmont & Waseca Canning Co. 45 N.W.2d 640 Minn. 1951
  • Senske v. Fairmont & Waseca Canning Co. 45 N.W.2d 640 Minn. 1951
    See, Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409 , 430-431 , , 732-733 ; Loew v. Hagerle Brothers, 226 Minn. 485 , 488 , , 601 ; Hanley v. Mulleneaux (Md.)
  • Fox v. Swartz 36 N.W.2d 708 Minn. 1949
  • Fox v. Swartz 36 N.W.2d 708 Minn. 1949
    In Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409 , 35 N. W. (2d) 719 , these provisions were construed in a case involving the issue of whether an employe who in fact had sustained compensable injuries from an accident could bring a common-law action in tort for serious permanent disfigurement resulting from the accident, but which did not materially affect her empl