DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co. Inc., 62 N.W.2d 492.

46 citing documents.

  • State of Minnesota v. Tyson Joe Hinckley Minn. 2024
  • State of Minnesota v. Tyson Joe Hinckley Minn. 2024
    Louis County, quoting, in turn, ).
  • State of Minnesota, by its Attorney General, Keith Ellison, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
    In other words, it is evidence which suffices to establish the fact unless rebutted, or until overcome, by other evidence.” (d 492, 498 (Minn. 1954)); accord Black’s Law Dictionary 1441 (11th ed. 2019) (defining “prima facie”).
  • Daly v. McFarland 812 N.W.2d 113 Minn. 2012
  • Daly v. McFarland 812 N.W.2d 113 Minn. 2012
    When given, it requires a jury to consider the fact of sudden peril as a circumstance in determining the reasonableness of a person’s response thereto.” Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co., 241 Minn. 79, 84
  • Southern Minnesota Beet Sugar Coop v. County of Renville 737 N.W.2d 545 Minn. 2007
  • Southern Minnesota Beet Sugar Coop v. County of Renville 737 N.W.2d 545 Minn. 2007
    Louis County, (quoting Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co., 241 Minn. 79, 87 , ); see Black’s Law Dictionary 1228 (8th ed.2004) (defining “prima facie” as “[s]ufficient to establish a fact or raise a presumption unless disproved or rebutted”).
  • State Farm Fire & Casualty v. Aquila Inc. 697 N.W.2d 636 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
  • State Farm Fire & Casualty v. Aquila Inc. 697 N.W.2d 636 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
    -20 (Minn.1995) (holding the district court properly .granted summary judgment when plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case of liability); Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co., 241 Minn. 79, 87 , (defining prima facie negligence).
  • Tousignant v. ST. LOUIS COUNTY, MN 615 N.W.2d 53 Minn. 2000
  • Tousignant v. ST. LOUIS COUNTY, MN 615 N.W.2d 53 Minn. 2000
    Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co., 241 Minn. 79, 87 , (citation omitted) (emphasis added); see also Black’s Law Dictionary 1209 (7th ed.1999) (defining “prima facie case”).
  • Sabasko v. Fletcher 359 N.W.2d 339 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • Sabasko v. Fletcher 359 N.W.2d 339 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Company, Inc., 241 Minn. 79, 85
  • Nelson v. Henning 354 N.W.2d 35 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • Nelson v. Henning 354 N.W.2d 35 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    In Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co., 241 Minn. 79 , Minder v. Peterson, 254 Minn. 82 , and Gave v. Pyrofax Gas Corp., 274 Minn. 210 , the Minnesota Supreme Court held that the question of defendant’s negligence could not be resolved as a matter of law since there was evidence in each case that the def
  • Toetschinger v. Ihnot 250 N.W.2d 204 Minn. 1977
  • Hakala v. Megarry Bros. 244 N.W.2d 156 Minn. 1976
  • Hakala v. Megarry Bros. 244 N.W.2d 156 Minn. 1976
    Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co. Inc. 241 Minn. 79
  • Tomforde v. Newman 244 N.W.2d 47 Minn. 1976
  • Tomforde v. Newman 244 N.W.2d 47 Minn. 1976
    Gave v. Pyrofax Gas Corp. supra; Minder v. Peterson, 254 Minn. 82 , Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co. Inc. 241 Minn. 79
  • Lindstrom v. Yellow Taxi Company of Minneapolis 214 N.W.2d 672 Minn. 1974
  • Lindstrom v. Yellow Taxi Company of Minneapolis 214 N.W.2d 672 Minn. 1974
    Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co. Inc. 241 Minn. 79
  • Emerson v. Eystad 181 N.W.2d 337 Minn. 1970
  • Emerson v. Eystad 181 N.W.2d 337 Minn. 1970
    that the jury may find either way on the question of whether a litigant has created an emergency, it is proper to instruct the jury on the emergency rule with directions that it is to be applied only if the jury finds that the emergency was not created by the one who seeks to invoke the rule.” See, also, Roeck v. Halvorson, 254 Minn. 394 , 95 N. W. (2d) 172 ; Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co. Inc. 241 Minn. 79 , 62 N. W. (2d) 492 ; Gran v. Dasovic, 275 Minn. 415 , 147 N. W. (2d) 576 ; Daly v. Spri
  • Baldwin v. CHICAGO AND NORTHWESTERN RAILWAY CO. 171 N.W.2d 89 Minn. 1969
  • Baldwin v. CHICAGO AND NORTHWESTERN RAILWAY CO. 171 N.W.2d 89 Minn. 1969
    Co. 241 Minn. 485 , 63 N. W. (2d) 560 ; Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co. 241 Minn. 79 , 62 N. W. (2d) 492 ; Nelson v. Twin City Motor Bus Co. 239 Minn. 276 , 58 N. W. (2d) 561 ; Wilson v. Home Gas Co. 267 Minn. 162 , 125 N. W. (2d) 725 .
  • Bymark v. Englert 168 N.W.2d 688 Minn. 1969
  • Bymark v. Englert 168 N.W.2d 688 Minn. 1969
    3 Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co. Inc. 241 Minn. 79 , 62 N. W. (2d) 492 .
  • Gran v. Dasovic 147 N.W.2d 576 Minn. 1966
  • Gran v. Dasovic 147 N.W.2d 576 Minn. 1966
    Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co. Inc. 241 Minn. 79 , 62 N. W. (2d) 492 ; Minder v. Peterson, 254 Minn. 82 , 93 N. W. (2d) 699 .
  • Gave v. PYROFAX GAS CORPORATION 143 N.W.2d 242 Minn. 1966
  • Gave v. PYROFAX GAS CORPORATION 143 N.W.2d 242 Minn. 1966
    and Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co. 241 Minn. 79 , 62 N. W. (2d) 492 , also involved accidents caused by brake failures.
  • Prink v. Tonak 140 N.W.2d 70 Minn. 1966
  • Prink v. Tonak 140 N.W.2d 70 Minn. 1966
    Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co. Inc. 241 Minn. 79 , 62 N. W. (2d) 492 , and Minder v. Peterson, 254 Minn. 82 , 93 N. W. (2d) 699 , cited by defendants in support of their contention on this point, have no application here.
  • Wallinga v. Johnson 131 N.W.2d 216 Minn. 1964
  • Wallinga v. Johnson 131 N.W.2d 216 Minn. 1964
    4 Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co. Inc. 241 Minn. 79 , 62 N. W. (2d) 492 .
  • Wilson v. Home Gas Co. Inc. 125 N.W.2d 725 Minn. 1964
  • Wilson v. Home Gas Co. Inc. 125 N.W.2d 725 Minn. 1964
    7 Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 51; cf. Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co. Inc. 241 Minn. 79 , 62 N. W. (2d) 492 .
  • Urban v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 96 N.W.2d 698 Minn. 1959
  • Urban v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co. 96 N.W.2d 698 Minn. 1959
    Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co. Inc. 241 Minn. 79 , 62 N. W. (2d) 492 .
  • Donald v. Moses 94 N.W.2d 255 Minn. 1959
  • Donald v. Moses 94 N.W.2d 255 Minn. 1959
    Co. 242 Minn. 388 , 65 N. W. (2d) 661 ; Storey v. Weinberg, 226 Minn. 48 , 31 N. W. (2d) 912 ; Greene v. Mathiowetz, 212 Minn. 171 , 3 N. W. (2d) 97 ; Donovan v. Ogston, 239 Minn. 553 , 59 N. W. (2d) 672 ; Hess v. Koskovitch, 241 Minn. 174 , 62 N. W. (2d) 806 ; Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co. Inc. 241 Minn. 79 , 62 N. W. (2d) 492 ; Peterson v. Lang, 239 Minn. 319 , 58 N. W. (2d) 609 ; MacIllravie v. St.
  • Minder v. Peterson 93 N.W.2d 699 Minn. 1958
  • Minder v. Peterson 93 N.W.2d 699 Minn. 1958
    4 The assignment in the motion for a new trial is stated: “That the court erred in instructing the jury as to the sudden peril rule.” 5 See, Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co. Inc. 241 Minn. 79 , 62 N. W. (2d) 492 .
  • Hagen v. Snow 69 N.W.2d 100 Minn. 1955
  • Hagen v. Snow 69 N.W.2d 100 Minn. 1955
    2 M. S. A. 169.96 provides: “In all civil actions, a violation of any of the provisions of this chapter, by either or any of the parties to such action or actions shall not be negligence per se but shall be prima facie evidence of negligence only.” 3 Trudeau v. Sina Contracting Co. Inc. 241 Minn. 79 , 62 N. W. (2d) 492 ; Leman v. Standard Oil Co. 238 Minn. 379 , 57 N. W. (2d) 814 ; Martin v. Tracy, 187 Minn. 529 , ; Brodd v. Priem, 236 Minn. 148 , 52 N. W. (2d) 429 ; Wojtowicz v. Belden, 211 Min