DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Malmquist v. Leeds, 71 N.W.2d 863.

34 citing documents.

  • Betzold v. Sherwin 404 N.W.2d 286 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • Betzold v. Sherwin 404 N.W.2d 286 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    Malmquist v. Leeds, 245 Minn. 130, 139
  • Nelson v. Williams 218 N.W.2d 471 Minn. 1974
  • Nelson v. Williams 218 N.W.2d 471 Minn. 1974
    See, Malmquist v. Leeds, 245 Minn. 130 , Pluwak v. Lindberg, 268 Minn. 524 , Reese v. Henke, 277 Minn. 151 , Seivert v. Bass, 288 Minn. 457
  • Dean v. Weisbrod 217 N.W.2d 739 Minn. 1974
  • Dean v. Weisbrod 217 N.W.2d 739 Minn. 1974
    The approach of the trial court to a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict has been otherwise defined in Malmquist v. Leeds, 245 Minn. 130, 134 , as follows: «* * * Unless the evidence, which must be viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, is so clear and conclusive as to preclude a reasonable difference of opinion among fair-minded men, the court should not [substitute] its judgment for that of the jury.” We addre
  • Peterson v. Balach 199 N.W.2d 639 Minn. 1972
  • Peterson v. Balach 199 N.W.2d 639 Minn. 1972
    Exceptions include a failure to warn of a known defect, Malmquist v. Leeds, 245 Minn. 130 , situations where a landlord has control of a common way, Taneian v. Meghrigian, 15 N. J. 267, 104 A. 2d 689 (1954) ; and situations where the visit occurs in a hotel and the visitor’s injury is caused by a latent defect of which he is not informed, Goldstein v. Healy, 187 Cal.
  • Conroy v. Kleinman Realty Co. 179 N.W.2d 162 Minn. 1970
  • Conroy v. Kleinman Realty Co. 179 N.W.2d 162 Minn. 1970
    There were no special circumstances to invoke the different results in Iverson v. Quam, 226 Minn. 290 , 32 N. W. (2d) 596 ; Malmquist v. Leeds, 245 Minn. 130 , 71 N. W. (2d) 863 ; Coenen v. Buckman Bldg.
  • Lyman v. Recreational Activities, Inc. 175 N.W.2d 498 Minn. 1970
  • Lyman v. Recreational Activities, Inc. 175 N.W.2d 498 Minn. 1970
    In Malmquist v. Leeds, 245 Minn. 130, 134 , 71 N. W. (2d) 863, 866 , this court held that it is the general rule in Minnesota that— “* * * one who is injured while walking in an unfamiliar situation in total darkness is, in the absence of special circumstances, guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law.” See, 13B Dunnell, Dig.
  • Mourning v. Interlachen Country Club 158 N.W.2d 244 Minn. 1968
  • Mourning v. Interlachen Country Club 158 N.W.2d 244 Minn. 1968
    In Malmquist v. Leeds, 245 Minn. 130, 134 , 71 N. W. (2d) 863, 866 , this court held that it is the general rule in Minnesota that— “* * * one who is injured while walking in an unfamiliar situation in total darkness is, in the absence of special circumstances, guilty of contributory negligence as a matter of law.” See, 13B Dunnell, Dig.
  • Carlson v. Rand 146 N.W.2d 190 Minn. 1966
  • Carlson v. Rand 146 N.W.2d 190 Minn. 1966
    The cases where this court has found it a duty to warn of a changed condition are those in which the plaintiff could not “discover it by the ordinary use of her faculties.” Malmquist v. Leeds, 245 Minn. 130, 139 , 71 N. W. (2d) 863, 869 .
  • Hanson v. Christensen 145 N.W.2d 868 Minn. 1966
  • Hanson v. Christensen 145 N.W.2d 868 Minn. 1966
    Other cases cited by plaintiffs in support of their claim that they are entitled to an affirmance are: Zuercher v. Northern Jobbing Co. 243 Minn. 166 , 66 N. W. (2d) 892 ; Malmquist v. Leeds, 245 Minn. 130 , 71 N. W. (2d) 863 ; Heitman v. City of Lake City, 225 Minn. 117 , 30 N. W. (2d) 18 ; Brightwell v. Beem (Fla.)
  • 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
    3 In the recent cases of Malmquist v. Leeds, 245 Minn. 130 , 71 N. W. (2d) 863 , and Glenn v. Munson, 259 Minn. 180 , 106 N. W. (2d) 551 , we considered the duty the possessor owed to the social guest and concluded that, although under the facts in those cases plaintiffs had previously been upon the property, they were nevertheless entitled to warning of changed conditions on
  • Thayer v. Silker 126 N.W.2d 263 Minn. 1964
  • Thayer v. Silker 126 N.W.2d 263 Minn. 1964
    Plaintiffs cite as controlling Malmquist v. Leeds, 245 Minn. 130 , 71 N. W. (2d) 863 .
  • State v. Pearson 110 N.W.2d 206 Minn. 1961
  • State v. Pearson 110 N.W.2d 206 Minn. 1961
    See, also, Malmquist v. Leeds, 245 Minn. 130 , 71 N. W. (2d) 863 .
  • Glenn v. Munson 106 N.W.2d 551 Minn. 1960
  • Followed Glenn v. Munson 106 N.W.2d 551 Minn. 1960
    1 Malmquist v. Leeds, 245 Minn. 130 , 71 N. W. (2d) 863 ; Meyer v. Mitchell, 248 Minn. 397 , 80 N. W. (2d) 450 ; Dishington v. A. W. Kuettel & Sons, Inc. 255 Minn. 325 , 96 N. W. (2d) 684 .
  • Besco v. Franken 101 N.W.2d 431 Minn. 1960
  • Besco v. Franken 101 N.W.2d 431 Minn. 1960
    Olson v. Penkert, 252 Minn. 334 , 90 N. W. (2d) 193 ; McDonough v. Newmans Cloak & Suit Co. 247 Minn. 250 , 77 N. W. (2d) 59 , 61 A. L. R. (2d) 100; Malmquist v. Leeds, 245 Minn. 130 , 71 N. W. (2d) 863 .
  • Dishington v. A. W. Kuettel & Sons, Inc. 96 N.W.2d 684 Minn. 1959
  • Dishington v. A. W. Kuettel & Sons, Inc. 96 N.W.2d 684 Minn. 1959
    8 See, Meyer v. Mitchell, 248 Minn. 397 , 80 N. W. (2d) 450 ; Malmquist v. Leeds, 245 Minn. 130 , 71 N. W. (2d) 863 ; 13 Dunnell, Dig.
  • Hill v. Gaertner 92 N.W.2d 810 Minn. 1958
  • Hill v. Gaertner 92 N.W.2d 810 Minn. 1958
    6 Vosbeck v. Lerdall, 245 Minn. 164 , 72 N. W. (2d) 371 ; Malmquist v. Leeds, 245 Minn. 130 , 71 N. W. (2d) 863 ; Judd v. Landin, 211 Minn. 465 , 1 N. W. (2d) 861 .
  • Meyer v. Mitchell 80 N.W.2d 450 Minn. 1957
  • Meyer v. Mitchell 80 N.W.2d 450 Minn. 1957
    6 Page v. Murphy, 194 Minn. 607 , ; Malmquist v. Leeds, 245 Minn. 130 , 71 N. W. (2d) 863 ; see, also, Lynghaug v. Payte, 247 Minn. 186 , 76 N. W. (2d) 660 .