Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Matthis v. Kennedy, 67 N.W.2d 413.

75 citing documents.

Dorn v. Peterson 512 N.W.2d 902 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
See Matthis v. Kennedy, 243 Minn. 219, 227-28
Villarreal v. Independent School District 659 505 N.W.2d 72 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Villarreal v. Independent School District 659 505 N.W.2d 72 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Immunity likewise extends beyond the courtroom to include “every proceeding of a judicial nature if the hearing is before a competent court or before a tribunal or officer clothed with judicial or even quasi-judicial powers.” Matthis v. Kennedy, 243 Minn. 219, 224
LeBaron v. Minnesota Board of Public Defense 499 N.W.2d 39 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
LeBaron v. Minnesota Board of Public Defense 499 N.W.2d 39 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
See generally Matthis v. Kennedy, 243 Minn. 219, 223, 224 , 417 (1954) (comparing absolute privilege and qualified privilege).
McGovern v. Cargill, Inc. 463 N.W.2d 556 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
McGovern v. Cargill, Inc. 463 N.W.2d 556 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Matthis v. Kennedy, 243 Minn. 219, 224
Rutherford v. County of Kandiyohi 449 N.W.2d 457 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Rutherford v. County of Kandiyohi 449 N.W.2d 457 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Matthis v. Kennedy, 243 Minn. 219, 223
McGaa v. Glumack 441 N.W.2d 823 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
McGaa v. Glumack 441 N.W.2d 823 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Matthis v. Kennedy, 243 Minn. 219, 222-23
Bird v. State, Department of Public Safety 375 N.W.2d 36 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Bird v. State, Department of Public Safety 375 N.W.2d 36 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
In Matthis v. Kennedy, 243 Minn. 219 , the supreme court discussed the law of defamation and the privileges which have evolved: We are concerned here with the law of defamation, the fundamental basis of which is that one is liable for an unprivileged communication or publication of false and defamatory matter which injures the reput
Jadwin v. Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co. 367 N.W.2d 476 Minn. 1985
Jadwin v. Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co. 367 N.W.2d 476 Minn. 1985
See Matthis v. Kennedy, 243 Minn. 219, 222-23 , Note, Minnesota Defamation Law and the Constitution: First Amendment Limitations on The Common Law Torts of Libel and Slander, 3 Wm.
Freier v. Independent School District No. 197 356 N.W.2d 724 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Freier v. Independent School District No. 197 356 N.W.2d 724 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
In Matthis v. Kennedy, 243 Minn. 219 , the supreme court extended the absolute judicial privilege to quasi-judicial proceedings: In judicial proceedings the privilege is not restricted to trials but includes every proceeding of a judicial nature if the hearing is before a competent court or before a tribunal or officer clothed with
Johnson v. Dirkswager 315 N.W.2d 215 Minn. 1982
Johnson v. Dirkswager 315 N.W.2d 215 Minn. 1982
See, e.g., Matthis v. Kennedy, 243 Minn. 219 , Minn.Const.
Nadeau v. County of Ramsey 277 N.W.2d 520 Minn. 1979
Nadeau v. County of Ramsey 277 N.W.2d 520 Minn. 1979
See, Matthis v. Kennedy, 243 Minn. 219, 222
Jenson v. Olson 141 N.W.2d 488 Minn. 1966
Jenson v. Olson 141 N.W.2d 488 Minn. 1966
The principles governing the privileged character of testimony given in a judicial proceeding have been fully developed in Matthis v. Kennedy, 243 Minn. 219 , 67 N. W. (2d) 413 , where we recognized an unqualified privilege against liability for slanderous statements, made even maliciously and with knowledge of their falsity, if they are (1) that of a witness, (2) at a judicial or quasi-judicial hearing, and (3) relevant to the subject matter of the litigation.
Hammersten v. Reiling 115 N.W.2d 259 Minn. 1962
Hammersten v. Reiling 115 N.W.2d 259 Minn. 1962
Matthis v. Kennedy, 243 Minn. 219 , 67 N. W. (2d) 413 .