DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite McNab v. Jeppesen, 102 N.W.2d 709.

29 citing documents.

  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
    -12 (Minn. 1960); d 828, 833 (Minn. App. 2003).
  • State v. Jackson 655 N.W.2d 828 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
  • State v. Jackson 655 N.W.2d 828 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
    See McNab v. Jeppesen, 258 Minn. 15, 18 , -12 (1960) (stating that when otherwise inadmissible opinion evidence is admitted without objection at trial, the evidence must be given probative force because the plaintiff is limited on appeal to objections raised during trial proceedings).
  • Parker v. Crabtree's Kitchen 404 N.W.2d 872 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • Parker v. Crabtree's Kitchen 404 N.W.2d 872 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    See McNab v. Jeppesen, 258 Minn. 15, 18 , -12 (1960).
  • Larson v. Anderson, Taunton & Walsh, Inc. 379 N.W.2d 615 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • Larson v. Anderson, Taunton & Walsh, Inc. 379 N.W.2d 615 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    Appellants argue that the evidence should have been admitted under the doctrine of “curative admissibility” citing McNab v. Jeppesen, 258 Minn. 15 , and Busch v. Busch Construction, Inc.
  • Sorensen v. Maski 361 N.W.2d 498 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • Sorensen v. Maski 361 N.W.2d 498 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    McNab v. Jeppesen, 258 Minn. 15, 17
  • State v. Dewey 272 N.W.2d 355 Minn. 1978
  • State v. Dewey 272 N.W.2d 355 Minn. 1978
    The approach of the Carmody case has been followed by this court in numerous cases since then: Schoeb v. Cowles, 279 Minn. 331 , Montagne v. Stenvold, 276 Minn. 547 , Murphy v. Hennen, 264 Minn. 457 , McNab v. Jeppesen, 258 Minn. 15
  • State v. Carlson 264 N.W.2d 639 Minn. 1978
  • State v. Carlson 264 N.W.2d 639 Minn. 1978
    See, also, McNab v. Jeppesen, 258 Minn. 15 , State v. DeZeler, 230 Minn. 39
  • Busch v. Busch Construction, Inc. 262 N.W.2d 377 Minn. 1977
  • Busch v. Busch Construction, Inc. 262 N.W.2d 377 Minn. 1977
    In McNab v. Jeppesen, 258 Minn. 15 , inadmissible expert opinion testimony on the point of vehicle impact in an automobile accident was elicited by a defendant on cross-examination and objected to on the incorrect ground of lack of foundation only.
  • Cambern v. Hubbling 238 N.W.2d 622 Minn. 1976
  • Cambern v. Hubbling 238 N.W.2d 622 Minn. 1976
    Schoeb v. Cowles, 279 Minn. 331 , McNab v. Jeppesen, 258 Minn. 15
  • Williams v. Hoyt Construction Co., Inc. 237 N.W.2d 339 Minn. 1975
  • Williams v. Hoyt Construction Co., Inc. 237 N.W.2d 339 Minn. 1975
    First, McNab v. Jeppesen, 258 Minn. 15 , on which relator relies, does not establish a doctrine of “fair play” which would permit a party to introduce whatever incompetent evidence it desires by the simple expedient of failing to object to the introduction of incompetent evidence by the opposing party.
  • Scheinkman v. International Credit System, Inc. 172 N.W.2d 407 Minn. 1969
  • Scheinkman v. International Credit System, Inc. 172 N.W.2d 407 Minn. 1969
    Anthony Falls Water-Power Co. 33 Minn. 265 , ; McNab v. Jeppesen, 258 Minn. 15 , 102 N. W. (2d) 709 ; Thoreson v. Minneapolis Harvester Works, 29 Minn. 341 , .
  • Schoeb v. Cowles 156 N.W.2d 895 Minn. 1968
  • Schoeb v. Cowles 156 N.W.2d 895 Minn. 1968
    McNab v. Jeppesen, 258 Minn. 15 , 102 N. W. (2d) 709 , relied upon by plaintiff, is not in point, for it holds that a judge may receive improper evidence objected to for the wrong reason, not that he must receive it.
  • Montagne v. Stenvold 148 N.W.2d 815 Minn. 1967
  • Montagne v. Stenvold 148 N.W.2d 815 Minn. 1967
    1 Murphy v. Hennen, 264 Minn. 457 , 119 N. W. (2d) 489 ; McNab v. Jeppesen, 258 Minn. 15 , 102 N. W. (2d) 709 ; Carmody v. Aho, 251 Minn. 19 , 86 N. W. (2d) 692 ; Beckman v. Schroeder, 224 Minn. 370 , 28 N. W. (2d) 629 .
  • Haukom v. Chicago Great Western Railway Co. 132 N.W.2d 271 Minn. 1964
  • Haukom v. Chicago Great Western Railway Co. 132 N.W.2d 271 Minn. 1964
    Ordinarily, it is for the trial court in its sound discretion to determine the sufficiency of the foundation for opinion evidence, McNab v. Jeppesen, 258 Minn. 15 , 102 N. W. (2d) 709 ; In re Estate of Palmer, 238 Minn. 549 , 57 N. W. (2d) 409 ; and here we find no abuse of such discretion.
  • Murphy v. Hennen 119 N.W.2d 489 Minn. 1963
  • Murphy v. Hennen 119 N.W.2d 489 Minn. 1963
    11 McNab v. Jeppesen, 258 Minn. 15 , 102 N. W. (2d) 709 ; Beckman v. Schroeder, 224 Minn. 370 , 28 N. W. (2d) 629 .