DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Smith v. Smith, 51 N.W.2d 276.

30 citing documents.

  • Ronald Hagle v. The Bank of New York Mellon, as Trustee of the Benefit of CWMBS Inc., Ryan … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
  • Ronald Hagle v. The Bank of New York Mellon, as Trustee of the Benefit of CWMBS Inc., Ryan … Minn. Ct. App. 2015
    When a particular issue is “withheld from consideration of the court, either by stipulation of the parties or otherwise, it is not adjudicated, and a judgment entered on other issues will not act as a bar to another action on the issues so withdrawn.” Smith v. Smith, 235 Minn. 412, 418, - 9 80 (1952).
  • G.A.W. v. D.M.W. 596 N.W.2d 284 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
  • Gaw v. Dmw 596 N.W.2d 284 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
  • Gaw v. Dmw 596 N.W.2d 284 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
    Smith v. Smith, 235 Minn. 412, 418
  • G.A.W. v. D.M.W. 596 N.W.2d 284 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
    Smith v. Smith, 235 Minn. 412, 418
  • State Ex Rel. Ondracek v. Blohm 363 N.W.2d 113 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State Ex Rel. Ondracek v. Blohm 363 N.W.2d 113 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    The trial court relied on Mund v. Mund, 252 Minn. 442 , and Smith v. Smith, 235 Minn. 412 , as limiting the conclusive effect of dissolution decrees.
  • Ellis v. Minneapolis Commission on Civil Rights 319 N.W.2d 702 Minn. 1982
  • Ellis v. Minneapolis Commission on Civil Rights 319 N.W.2d 702 Minn. 1982
    While, as a general rule, a verdict does not operate as an estoppel until it becomes a judgment, see, e.g., Brooks Realty, Inc. v. Aetna Insurance Co., 268 Minn. 122 , Smith v. Smith, 235 Minn. 412 , exceptions to that general rule have been recognized “where the parties have acquiesced in the verdict” and “where, through the lapse of time or other cause, a motion for a new trial or arrest of judgment cannot be granted.” Miller v. Simons, 239 Minn. 523, 527
  • Howe v. Nelson 135 N.W.2d 687 Minn. 1965
  • Howe v. Nelson 135 N.W.2d 687 Minn. 1965
    5 Smith v. Smith, 235 Minn. 412 , 51 N. W. (2d) 276 , 32 A. L. R. (2d) 1135; Wolfson v. Northern States Management Co. 221 Minn. 474 , 22 N. W. (2d) 545 ; Gustafson v. Gustafson, 178 Minn. 1 , .
  • Gollner v. Cram 102 N.W.2d 521 Minn. 1960
  • Gollner v. Cram 102 N.W.2d 521 Minn. 1960
    3 Smith v. Smith, 235 Minn. 412 , 51 N. W. (2d) 276 , 32 A. L. R. (2d) 1135; Bernstein v. Levitz, 223 Minn. 46 , 25 N. W. (2d) 289 .
  • Cut Price Super Markets v. Kingpin Foods, Inc. 98 N.W.2d 257 Minn. 1959
  • Cut Price Super Markets v. Kingpin Foods, Inc. 98 N.W.2d 257 Minn. 1959
    Jur., Contracts, § 449; Smith v. Smith, 235 Minn. 412 , 51 N. W. (2d) 276 , 32 A. L. R. (2d) 1135, wherein this court defined waiver as a voluntary relinquishment of a known right; Dobie v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. 164 Va.
  • Alsleben v. Oliver Corporation 94 N.W.2d 354 Minn. 1959
  • Alsleben v. Oliver Corporation 94 N.W.2d 354 Minn. 1959
    9 Smith v. Smith, 235 Minn. 412 , 51 N. W. (2d) 276 , 32 A. L. R. (2d) 1135.
  • Mund v. Mund 90 N.W.2d 309 Minn. 1958
  • Mund v. Mund 90 N.W.2d 309 Minn. 1958
    O’Neil v. Rueb, 215 Minn. 296 , 10 N. W. (2d) 363 ; Smith v. Smith, 235 Minn. 412 , 51 N. W. (2d) 276 , 32 A. L. R. (2d) 1135; Nelson v. Dorr, 239 Minn. 423 , 58 N. W. (2d) 876 .
  • Local 1142 v. United Electrical, Radio & MacHine Workers 76 N.W.2d 481 Minn. 1956
  • Local 1142 v. United Electrical, Radio & MacHine Workers 76 N.W.2d 481 Minn. 1956
    Smith v. Smith, 235 Minn. 412 , 51 N. W. (2d) 276 , 32 A. L. R. (2d) 1135.
  • Miller v. Simons 59 N.W.2d 837 Minn. 1953
  • Miller v. Simons 59 N.W.2d 837 Minn. 1953
    Co. 61 Minn. 423 , ; Gustafson v. Gustafson, 178 Minn. 1 , ; Wolfson v. Northern States Management Co. 221 Minn. 474 , 22 N. W. (2d) 545 ; Smith v. Smith, 235 Minn. 412 , 51 N. W. (2d) 276 ; 3 Dunnell, Dig.
  • Nelson v. Dorr 58 N.W.2d 876 Minn. 1953
  • Nelson v. Dorr 58 N.W.2d 876 Minn. 1953
    With reference to the effect of a prior judgment as a bar in subsequent proceedings, in Smith v. Smith, 235 Minn. 412, 418 , 51 N. W. (2d) 276, 279 , this court recently stated: “Where a particular matter or issue is withdrawn or withheld from consideration of the court, either by stipulation of the parties or otherwise, it is not adjudicated, and a judgment entered on other issues will not act as a bar to another action on the issue
  • Bunge v. Yager 52 N.W.2d 446 Minn. 1952
  • Bunge v. Yager 52 N.W.2d 446 Minn. 1952
    *247 The distinction between estoppel by verdict 2 and estoppel by judgment is discussed in the recent case of Smith v. Smith, 235 Minn. 412 , 51 N. W. (2d) 276 .
  • Schwartz v. First Trust Co. 52 N.W.2d 290 Minn. 1952
  • Schwartz v. First Trust Co. 52 N.W.2d 290 Minn. 1952
    Cromwell v. County of Sac, 94 U. S. (Otto) 351, 353, 24 L. ed. 195, 198; Wolfson v. Northern States Management Co. 221 Minn. 474 , 22 N. W. (2d) 545 ; Smith v. Smith, 235 Minn. 412 , 51 N. W. (2d) 276 ; 2 Pirsig’s Dunnell, Minn. Pl.