Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Nepstad v. Lambert, 50 N.W.2d 614.

34 citing documents.

Urban Ex Rel. Urban v. American Legion Post 184 695 N.W.2d 153 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Urban Ex Rel. Urban v. American Legion Post 184 695 N.W.2d 153 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
As such, “[d]etailed authoritative control must be distinguished from mere designation of work.” Nepstad v. Lambert, 235 Minn. 1, 14
Sutherland v. Barton 570 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 1997
Sutherland v. Barton 570 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 1997
Nepstad v. Lambert, 235 Minn. 1, 16
Hix v. Minnesota Workers' Compensation Assigned Risk Plan 520 N.W.2d 497 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Hix v. Minnesota Workers' Compensation Assigned Risk Plan 520 N.W.2d 497 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Id.; see also Nepstad v. Lambert, 235 Minn. 1, 16 , -23 (1951) (defendant exclusively directed all movements made by the loaned crane and loaned operator); St.
Danek v. Meldrum Manufacturing & Engineering Co. 252 N.W.2d 255 Minn. 1977
Danek v. Meldrum Manufacturing & Engineering Co. 252 N.W.2d 255 Minn. 1977
See, Nepstad v. Lambert, 235 Minn. 1
Rademaker v. Archer Daniels Midland Co. 247 N.W.2d 28 Minn. 1976
Rademaker v. Archer Daniels Midland Co. 247 N.W.2d 28 Minn. 1976
The principal cases relied upon by ADM are Nepstad v. Lambert, 235 Minn. 1 , Lindbery v. J. A. Danens & Son, Inc. 266 Minn. 420 , Guhlke v. Roberts Truck Lines, 268 Minn. 141 , Ismil v. L. H. Sowles Co. 295 Minn. 120 , and St.
Pfeifer v. Truck Crane Service Co. 242 N.W.2d 587 Minn. 1976
Pfeifer v. Truck Crane Service Co. 242 N.W.2d 587 Minn. 1976
Nepstad v. Lambert, 235 Minn. 1 , Knutson v. Lambert, 235 Minn. 328
Lametti v. Peter Lametti Construction Co. 232 N.W.2d 435 Minn. 1975
Lametti v. Peter Lametti Construction Co. 232 N.W.2d 435 Minn. 1975
Although defendant contends that the jury was without the benefit of an adequate instruction on the question of whether the employees were “loaned servants” of Peter Lametti as landowner, our reading of the court’s instruction on that issue shows it to be correct and adequate in all respects under the guidelines set forth in Nepstad v. Lambert, 235 Minn. 1
Ismil v. LH Sowles Company 203 N.W.2d 354 Minn. 1972
Ismil v. LH Sowles Company 203 N.W.2d 354 Minn. 1972
Nepstad v. Lambert, 235 Minn. 1 , is the leading Minnesota case on the loaned-servant doctrine.
Thill v. Modern Erecting Company 136 N.W.2d 677 Minn. 1965
Thill v. Modern Erecting Company 136 N.W.2d 677 Minn. 1965
Modern contends that the evidence at least raises a fact issue whether, under the rule of Nepstad v. Lambert, 235 Minn. 1 , 50 N. W. (2d) 614 , Stowe and Janshen at the time of the accident were servants loaned to J. D. & P. However, we do not find sufficient evidence to require submitting that issue.
Botz v. Krips 126 N.W.2d 446 Minn. 1964
Botz v. Krips 126 N.W.2d 446 Minn. 1964
2 See, Nepstad v. Lambert, 235 Minn. 1, 18 , 50 N. W. (2d) 614, 624 ; Schleuder v. Soltow, 239 Minn. 453, 462 , 59 N. W. (2d) 320, 326 ; Gracz v. Anderson, 104 Minn. 476 , ; 19 Dunnell, Dig.
Elwell v. Fake 119 N.W.2d 19 Minn. 1962
Elwell v. Fake 119 N.W.2d 19 Minn. 1962
In this situation, it can scarcely be doubted that while decedent was en route for the corporation the latter could exercise that detailed authoritative control over him which we have often held requisite to the employer-employee relationship, Nepstad v. Lambert, 235 Minn. 1 , 50 N. W. (2d) 614 ; Krause v. Bodin, 172 Minn. 467 , ; Rouse v. Town of Bird Island, 169 Minn. 367 , ; Herron v. Coolsaet Bros. 158 Minn. 522 , ; and the fact that decedent may have at times received wages from Fake would
Besch v. Village of Arden Hills 115 N.W.2d 338 Minn. 1962
Besch v. Village of Arden Hills 115 N.W.2d 338 Minn. 1962
We have discussed the loaned-servant doctrine in Nepstad v. Lambert, 235 Minn. 1 , 50 N. W. (2d) 614 , and Pocrnich v. Snyder Min.
Kirkwood v. Sikorski 115 N.W.2d 32 Minn. 1962
Kirkwood v. Sikorski 115 N.W.2d 32 Minn. 1962
P. & S. S. M. R. Co. 244 Minn. 1 , 68 N. W. (2d) 873 ; Nepstad v. Lambert, 235 Minn. 1 , 50 N. W. (2d) 614 .
Stotzheim v. Djos 98 N.W.2d 129 Minn. 1959
Stotzheim v. Djos 98 N.W.2d 129 Minn. 1959
Darian v. McGrath, 215 Minn. 389 , 10 N. W. (2d) 403 ; Sharp v. Johnson, 248 Minn. 518 , 80 N. W. (2d) 650 ; Burt v. Richardson, 251 Minn. 335 , 87 N. W. (2d) 833 ; Nepstad v. Lambert, 235 Minn. 1 , 50 N. W. (2d) 614 .
Ahlstrom v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railroad 68 N.W.2d 873 Minn. 1955
Ahlstrom v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie Railroad 68 N.W.2d 873 Minn. 1955
Nepstad v. Lambert, 235 Minn. 1 , 50 N. W. (2d) 614 , 36 Minn. L. Rev. 290 ; St.
Moeller v. Hauser 54 N.W.2d 639 Minn. 1952
Moeller v. Hauser 54 N.W.2d 639 Minn. 1952
Joseph’s Hospital, 212 Minn. 558 , 4 N. W. *377 (2d) 637, and Nepstad v. Lambert, 235 Minn. 1 , 50 N. W. (2d) 614 , in support of this argument.
Knutson v. Lambert 51 N.W.2d 580 Minn. 1951
Knutson v. Lambert 51 N.W.2d 580 Minn. 1951
This is a companion case to No. 35,341, Nepstad v. Lambert and others (the same defendants), 235 Minn. 1 , 50 N. W. (2d) 614 , in which an opinion was filed August 3, 1951, and in which an application for rehearing was denied.