Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Bunge v. Yager, 52 N.W.2d 446.

30 citing documents.

Dave Knutson Siding LLC v. Dustin Fetter, Lisa Thostenson Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Dave Knutson Siding LLC v. Dustin Fetter, Lisa Thostenson Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(stating that “where action is not taken to bring [coparties] into an adversary relationship, their rights and liabilities as against each other are not 8 determined”).2 Because Fetter and Strecker were not Thostenson’s opposing parties, she was no
Bethesda Lutheran Church v. Twin City Construction Co. 356 N.W.2d 344 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Bethesda Lutheran Church v. Twin City Construction Co. 356 N.W.2d 344 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
[It] rests upon a common liability of joint tortfeasors to an injured party and the payment of more than his share by one of the codefendants * * * Bunge v. Yager, 236 Minn. 245, 252
Hart v. Cessna Aircraft Co. 276 N.W.2d 166 Minn. 1979
Hart v. Cessna Aircraft Co. 276 N.W.2d 166 Minn. 1979
See, Bunge v. Yager, 236 Minn. 245, 252
Spitzack v. Schumacher 241 N.W.2d 641 Minn. 1976
Overruled Spitzack v. Schumacher 241 N.W.2d 641 Minn. 1976
liability which is the fundamental basis for contribution.” We further stated that ( 213 Minn. 127 , )— “* * * any expressions in any of our opinions which tend to support the theory that such a judgment is of no effect and that the unsuccessful defendant may relitigate the liability of the successful defendant to the injured person should be and are overruled.” In Bunge v. Yager, 236 Minn. 245, 252 , we stated that— “* * * an action for contribution rests upon a common liability of joint tortfe
Shimp Ex Rel. Shimp v. Sederstrom 233 N.W.2d 292 Minn. 1975
Shimp Ex Rel. Shimp v. Sederstrom 233 N.W.2d 292 Minn. 1975
In Bunge v. Yager, 236 Minn. 245 , A recovered a verdict against both B and C in an action alleging joint negligence.
Margo-Kraft Distributors, Inc. v. Minneapolis Gas Co. 200 N.W.2d 45 Minn. 1972
Margo-Kraft Distributors, Inc. v. Minneapolis Gas Co. 200 N.W.2d 45 Minn. 1972
A comparable, although not completely parallel, situation was presented in Bunge v. Yager, 236 Minn. 245 , 36 Minn. L. Rev. 983 , where in a personal injury action by an injured plaintiff against codefendants, each of the defendants claimed by answer that the other was negligent but did not file a cross-claim against the other.
Hentschel v. Smith 153 N.W.2d 199 Minn. 1967
Hentschel v. Smith 153 N.W.2d 199 Minn. 1967
y records the agreement of the parties with respect to the matters in litigation.” In Owsiejko v. American Hardware Corp. 137 Conn. 185, 187 , 75 A. (2d) 404, 406, the Connecticut court said: “* * * A consent judgment is a contract between the parties approved by the court, and its terms may not be extended beyond the agreement entered into.” Both parties on this appeal have cited Bunge v. Yager, 236 Minn. 245 , 52 N. W. (2d) 446 , in support of certain contentions in their briefs.
McMenomy v. Ryden 148 N.W.2d 804 Minn. 1967
McMenomy v. Ryden 148 N.W.2d 804 Minn. 1967
& Loan *67 Co. v. Bartsch, 51 Minn. 474 , , 38 A. S. R. 511; Bunge v. Yager, 236 Minn. 245 , 52 N. W. (2d) 446 .
Lustik v. Rankila 131 N.W.2d 741 Minn. 1964
Anderson v. Gabrielson 126 N.W.2d 239 Minn. 1964
Anderson v. Gabrielson 126 N.W.2d 239 Minn. 1964
8 Bunge v. Yager, 236 Minn. 245, 253 , 52 N. W. (2d) 446, 450 ; Bocchi v. Karnstedt, 238 Minn. 257, 261 , 56 N. W. (2d) 628, 631 ; Mocuik v. Svoboda, 253 Minn. 562, 566 , 93 N. W. (2d) 547, 550 ; Radmacher v. Cardinal, 264 Minn. 72, 75 , 117 N. W. (2d) 738, 741 ; 37 Minn. L. Rev. 479 .
Radmacher v. Cardinal 117 N.W.2d 738 Minn. 1962
Radmacher v. Cardinal 117 N.W.2d 738 Minn. 1962
Note, 37 Minn. L. Rev. 470 , 479; Bunge v. Yager, 236 Minn. 245, 253 , 52 N. W. (2d) 446, 450 .
Coble v. Lacey 101 N.W.2d 594 Minn. 1960
Coble v. Lacey 101 N.W.2d 594 Minn. 1960
Lacey relies to some extent upon the language found in Bunge v. Yager, 236 Minn. 245, 254 , 52 N. W. (2d) 446, 451 , where we said: “Since territorial days we have had a statute (R. S. 1851, c. 70, § 159, now M. S. A. 548.02) which provides that when justice demands it the court may determine the ultimate rights of the parties on each side of a suit as between themselves.
Mocuik v. Svoboda 93 N.W.2d 547 Minn. 1958
Mocuik v. Svoboda 93 N.W.2d 547 Minn. 1958
3 See, Bunge v. Yager, 236 Minn. 245 , 52 N. W. (2d) 446 .
State v. Minnesota Power & Light Co. 75 N.W.2d 386 Minn. 1956
State v. Minnesota Power & Light Co. 75 N.W.2d 386 Minn. 1956
Bunge v. Yager, 236 Minn. 245 , 52 N. W. (2d) 446 .
Nelson v. the Swedish Hospital 64 N.W.2d 38 Minn. 1954
Nelson v. the Swedish Hospital 64 N.W.2d 38 Minn. 1954
Bunge v. Yager, 236 Minn. 245 , 52 N. W. (2d) 446 ; American Motorists Ins.
Norton v. Nelson 53 N.W.2d 31 Minn. 1952