DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Knutson v. Arrigoni Brothers Co., 147 N.W.2d 561.

37 citing documents.

  • Bjerke v. Johnson 742 N.W.2d 660 Minn. 2007
  • Bjerke v. Johnson 742 N.W.2d 660 Minn. 2007
    Because a plaintiffs ability to appreciate the danger arising from her behavior is a key component of assumption of the risk, Knutson v. Arrigoni Bros. Co., 275 Minn. 408, 413-14 , we find it difficult to conclude that children could meaningfully assume the risks of sexual assault.
  • Sandborg v. Blue Earth County 615 N.W.2d 61 Minn. 2000
  • Sandborg v. Blue Earth County 615 N.W.2d 61 Minn. 2000
    See Knutson v. Arrigoni Bros. Co., 275 Minn. 408, 413
  • Gordon v. Hoffman 303 N.W.2d 250 Minn. 1981
  • Gordon v. Hoffman 303 N.W.2d 250 Minn. 1981
    Knutson v. Arrigoni Bros. Co., 275 Minn. 408
  • American Reliable Insurance v. Modern Homes, Inc. 247 N.W.2d 39 Minn. 1976
  • American Reliable Insurance v. Modern Homes, Inc. 247 N.W.2d 39 Minn. 1976
    See Knutson v. Arrigoni Brothers Co., 275 Minn. 408 , * * The failure to instruct in the present case should have been patently obvious and involved no complex or esoteric point of law.
  • Evanson v. Jerowski 241 N.W.2d 636 Minn. 1976
  • Evanson v. Jerowski 241 N.W.2d 636 Minn. 1976
    As we said in the case of Knutson v. Arrigoni Brothers Co. 275 Minn. 408, 415 , : “* * * While Rule 51, Rules of Civil Procedure, does permit errors in instructions with respect to fundamental law to be raised on a motion for new trial, it was never intended that experienced counsel could tacitly agree to instructions of the court which omit a theory that might
  • Kindt v. Yellow Cab of Winona, Inc. 218 N.W.2d 459 Minn. 1974
  • Kindt v. Yellow Cab of Winona, Inc. 218 N.W.2d 459 Minn. 1974
    Our ruling in the case of Knutson v. Arrigoni Brothers Co. 275 Minn. 408 , also seems to be particularly relevant to the issue raised in this case.
  • Erickson v. Sorenson 211 N.W.2d 883 Minn. 1973
  • Erickson v. Sorenson 211 N.W.2d 883 Minn. 1973
    This court has similarly held that “we are not inclined to give shelter under Rules of Civil Procedure, Rule 51, where counsel by failure to object have tacitly agreed to the instructions of the court.” Mineral Resources, Inc. v. Mahnomen Const. Co. 289 Minn. 412, 418 , citing Knutson v. Arrigoni Brothers Co. 275 Minn. 408, 415 , and Hemming v. Ald, Inc. 279 Minn. 38, 46
  • Forsythe v. City of Thief River Falls 208 N.W.2d 756 Minn. 1973
  • Forsythe v. City of Thief River Falls 208 N.W.2d 756 Minn. 1973
    Cf. Knutson v. Arrigoni Brothers Co. 275 Minn. 408, 415
  • STEENBERG CONSTRUCTION CO. v. Rohr 207 N.W.2d 722 Minn. 1973
  • STEENBERG CONSTRUCTION CO. v. Rohr 207 N.W.2d 722 Minn. 1973
    See, Knutson v. Arrigoni Brothers Co. 275 Minn. 408, 414
  • DelMedico v. Coats 203 N.W.2d 860 Minn. 1973
  • DelMedico v. Coats 203 N.W.2d 860 Minn. 1973
    *231 We feel that Knutson v. Arrigoni Brothers Co. 275 Minn. 408 , is determinative on this question, and no relief can be given to defendant on this point.
  • Mineral Resources, Inc. v. Mahnomen Construction Co. 184 N.W.2d 780 Minn. 1971
  • Mineral Resources, Inc. v. Mahnomen Construction Co. 184 N.W.2d 780 Minn. 1971
    Knutson v. Arrigoni Brothers Co. 275 Minn. 408, 415 , 147 N. W. (2d) 561, 566 ; Hemming v. Ald, Inc. 279 Minn. 38, 46 , 155 N. W. (2d) 384, 390 .
  • Greaves v. Galchutt 184 N.W.2d 26 Minn. 1971
  • Greaves v. Galchutt 184 N.W.2d 26 Minn. 1971
    2 “* * * [T]he essential elements in assumption of risk are a knowledge of the danger and an intelligent acquiescence in it or a willingness to encounter the danger in spite of the knowledge.” Knutson v. Arrigoni Brothers Co. 275 Minn. 408, 413 , 147 N. W. (2d) 561, 565 .
  • Magnuson v. Rupp Manufacturing, Inc. 171 N.W.2d 201 Minn. 1969
  • Parness v. Economics Laboratory, Inc. 170 N.W.2d 554 Minn. 1969
  • Followed Parness v. Economics Laboratory, Inc. 170 N.W.2d 554 Minn. 1969
    While we have acknowledged the difficulty of distinguishing the difference between assumption of risk and contributory negligence with any precision, Knutson v. Arrigoni Brothers Co. 275 Minn. 408 , 147 N. W. (2d) 561 , we reaffirm our declaration that the rules as a matter of substantive tort law could probably not be better stated then they are in Minnesota Jury Instruction Guides.
  • Ganser v. Erickson 156 N.W.2d 224 Minn. 1968
  • Ganser v. Erickson 156 N.W.2d 224 Minn. 1968
    The issues are not the same, of course, but do bear similarities, as Mr. Chief Justice Knutson recently noted in Knutson v. Arrigoni Brothers Co. 275 Minn. 408, 413 , 147 N. W. (2d) 561 , 565: “* * * [T]he essential elements in assumption of risk are a knowledge of the danger and an intelligent acquiescence in it or a willingness to encounter the danger in spite of the knowledge, while contributory negligence involves a departure from that standard of reasonable conduct whic
  • Hemming v. Ald, Inc. 155 N.W.2d 384 Minn. 1967
  • Hemming v. Ald, Inc. 155 N.W.2d 384 Minn. 1967
    Mr. Chief Justice Knutson wrote in Knutson v. Arrigoni Brothers Co. 275 Minn. 408, 415 , 147 N. W. (2d) 561 , 566: *47 “* * * While Rule 51, Rules of Civil Procedure, does permit errors in instructions with respect to fundamental law to be raised on a motion for new trial, it was never intended that experienced counsel could tacitly agree to instructions of the court which omit a theory that might
  • Stephenson v. F. W. Woolworth Co. 152 N.W.2d 138 Minn. 1967
  • Stephenson v. F. W. Woolworth Co. 152 N.W.2d 138 Minn. 1967
    We recently attempted to define the prerequisites to application of this defense in Knutson v. Arrigoni Brothers Co. 275 Minn. 408 , 147 N. W. (2d) 561 .
  • Bates v. ROOT-LOWELL MANUFACTURING COMPANY 149 N.W.2d 507 Minn. 1967
  • Bates v. ROOT-LOWELL MANUFACTURING COMPANY 149 N.W.2d 507 Minn. 1967
    The general considerations applicable where contributory negligence and assumption of risk are asserted as defenses in an action for personal injuries are set out in Knutson v. Arrigoni Brothers Co. 275 Minn. 408 , 147 N. W. (2d) 561 .
  • Davis v. Re-Trac Manufacturing Corporation 149 N.W.2d 37 Minn. 1967
  • Davis v. Re-Trac Manufacturing Corporation 149 N.W.2d 37 Minn. 1967
    See, Jones v. Magoon, 119 Minn. 434 , ; Tysk v. Griggs, 253 Minn. 86 , 91 N. W. (2d) 127 ; Knutson v. Arrigoni Brothers Co. 275 Minn. 408 , 147 N. W. (2d) 561 .