DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Shumway v. Nelson, 107 N.W.2d 531.

32 citing documents.

  • Tezak v. Bachke 698 N.W.2d 37 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
  • Ortiz Ex Rel. Ortiz v. Gavenda 590 N.W.2d 119 Minn. 1999
  • Ortiz Ex Rel. Ortiz v. Gavenda 590 N.W.2d 119 Minn. 1999
    See Regie, d at 92 ; see also Shumway v. Nelson, 259 Minn. 319, 323-24 , (rejecting an assertion that the decedent’s sole beneficiary rather than the trustee was the real party in interest in a wrongful death action).
  • Ortiz v. Gavenda 574 N.W.2d 764 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
  • Ortiz v. Gavenda 574 N.W.2d 764 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
    See Bonhiver v. Fugelso, Porter, Simich and Whiteman, Inc., (prerequisites to bringing wrongful death action are generally strictly construed, but remedial provisions should be liberally construed); Shumway v. Nelson, 259 Minn. 319, 322 , (wrongful death statute “is remedial in character and thus requires a liberal construction.”); Fussner v. Andert, 261 Minn. 347, 354 , (wrongful death statute is remedial in character and “it is the court’s duty to construe it liberally in light of current s
  • American National Fire Insurance Co. v. Cordie 478 N.W.2d 531 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
  • American National Fire Insurance Co. v. Cordie 478 N.W.2d 531 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
    Fussner v. Andert, 261 Minn. 347, 354 , Shumway v. Nelson, 259 Minn. 319, 322 , Nebola v. Minnesota Iron Co., 102 Minn. 89, 91 , 112 N.W.
  • Johnson v. Consolidated Freightways, Inc. 420 N.W.2d 608 Minn. 1988
  • Johnson v. Consolidated Freightways, Inc. 420 N.W.2d 608 Minn. 1988
    Regie, d at 89 ; Shumway v. Nelson, 259 Minn. 319, 322 , -33 (1961).
  • Kensinger v. Kippen 390 N.W.2d 815 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • Kensinger v. Kippen 390 N.W.2d 815 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    Kensinger argues that the wrongful death act creates a cause of action for the benefit of survivors, see Shumway v. Nelson, 259 Minn. 319 , that he could not bring suit until Darlene Kensinger died, and that therefore the cause of action accrued on her death.
  • Bonhiver v. Fugelso, Porter, Simich & Whiteman, Inc. 355 N.W.2d 138 Minn. 1984
  • Bonhiver v. Fugelso, Porter, Simich & Whiteman, Inc. 355 N.W.2d 138 Minn. 1984
    In contrast to the prerequisites to bringing suit, the remedy provisions of the wrongful death statute have been explicitly held to be “remedial in character and it is the court’s duty to construe [them] liberally * * *.” Fussner v. Andert, 261 Minn. 347, 354 , citing Shumway v. Nelson, 259 Minn. 319, 322
  • Huebner v. Deuchle 501 P.2d 417 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1972
  • Martz v. Revier 170 N.W.2d 83 Minn. 1969
  • Martz v. Revier 170 N.W.2d 83 Minn. 1969
    R. Co. 98 Minn. 296 , ; Jenson v. Glemaker, 195 Minn. 556 , ; Mattfeld v. Nester, 226 Minn. 106 , 32 N. W. (2d) 291 , 3 A. L. R. (2d) 909; Shumway v. Nelson, 259 Minn. 319 , 107 N. W. (2d) 531 ; Hondl v. Chicago G. W. Ry.
  • Pierce v. Foley Bros., Inc. 168 N.W.2d 346 Minn. 1969
  • Pierce v. Foley Bros., Inc. 168 N.W.2d 346 Minn. 1969
    See, for example, Rowan v. K. W. McKee, Inc. 262 Minn. 366 , 114 N. W. (2d) 692 ; Hill v. Stokely-Van Camp, Inc. 260 Minn. 315 , 109 N. W. (2d) 749 ; Shumway v. Nelson, 259 Minn. 319 , 107 N. W. (2d) 531 ; Stevens v. Lycan & Co. 259 Minn. 106 , 105 N. W. (2d) 889 .
  • Balts v. Balts 142 N.W.2d 66 Minn. 1966
  • Balts v. Balts 142 N.W.2d 66 Minn. 1966
    More recently, where a child was the sole beneficiary in an action for the wrongful death of her mother against the estate of her father, we noted in Shumway v. Nelson, 259 Minn. 319, 324 , 107 N. W. (2d) 531 , 534: “* * * In view of the substantial and growing modern authority repudiating the doctrine of intrafamily immunity even in direct suits, we can find no justification for overruling the Albrecht case.” Nevertheless, in so holding we continued explicitly to recognize the doctrine of paren
  • Poepping v. Lindemann 127 N.W.2d 512 Minn. 1964
  • Poepping v. Lindemann 127 N.W.2d 512 Minn. 1964
    In Shumway v. Nelson, 259 Minn. 319 , 107 N. W. (2d) 531 , followed in Nelson v. Home Decorating Co. 260 Minn. 121 , 109 N. W. (2d) 154 , it was held1 that a trustee asserting a cause of action under Minn. St.
  • Dahl v. NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL BANK MINNEAPOLIS 121 N.W.2d 321 Minn. 1963
  • Dahl v. NORTHWESTERN NATIONAL BANK MINNEAPOLIS 121 N.W.2d 321 Minn. 1963
    Shumway v. Nelson, 259 Minn. 319 , 107 N. W. (2d) 531 .
  • Pelowski v. Frederickson 116 N.W.2d 701 Minn. 1962
  • Pelowski v. Frederickson 116 N.W.2d 701 Minn. 1962
    “* * * it is my candid opinion that the time has come when a reexamination of the validity of the rule of Strom v. Strom [ 98 Minn. 427 , ] should be made in the light of present modern day conditions.” The trial court also cited Kyle v. Kyle, 210 Minn. 204 , ; and Shumway v. Nelson, 259 Minn. 319 , 107 N. W. (2d) 531 .
  • Village of Roseville v. Sunset Memorial Park Assn. Inc. 113 N.W.2d 857 Minn. 1962
  • Village of Roseville v. Sunset Memorial Park Assn. Inc. 113 N.W.2d 857 Minn. 1962
    1 House v. Hanson, 245 Minn. 466 , 72 N. W. (2d) 874 ; In re Estate and Guardianships of Williams, 254 Minn. 272 , 95 N. W. (2d) 91 ; Stevens v. Lycan & Co. 259 Minn. 106 , 105 N. W. (2d) 889 ; Shumway v. Nelson, 259 Minn. 319 , 107 N. W. (2d) 531 .
  • Fussner v. Andert 113 N.W.2d 355 Minn. 1961
  • Fussner v. Andert 113 N.W.2d 355 Minn. 1961
    In the recent case of Shumway v. Nelson, 259 Minn. 319, 322 , 107 N. W. (2d) 531, 533 , we did not hesitate to extend the application of the act in a case involving the marital-immunity doctrine where we felt to do so was in accord with present-day needs.
  • Nelson v. Home Decorating Co. 109 N.W.2d 154 Minn. 1961
  • Nelson v. Home Decorating Co. 109 N.W.2d 154 Minn. 1961
    2 This precise issue was before us in Shumway v. Nelson, 259 Minn. 319 , 107 N. W. (2d) 531 .