Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Coenen v. Buckman Building Corporation, 153 N.W.2d 329.

42 citing documents.

Sustainable 9, LLC d/b/a Sustainable 9 Design + Build, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Corp., (noting that unobjected-to jury instructions become the law of the case after the district court charges the jury).
James F. Christie, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Vickie M. Jones, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Corp., (noting that unobjected-to jury instructions become the law of the case).
Eric Berg, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Tony Flattum, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Corp. , (noting that unobjected-to jury instructions become the law of the case after the district court charges the jury).
Murphy Dressen Consulting, LLC, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Robinson v. MacK Trucks, Inc. 426 N.W.2d 220 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Robinson v. MacK Trucks, Inc. 426 N.W.2d 220 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Coenen v. Buckman Building Corp., 278 Minn. 193, 198
Altman v. Knox Lumber Co. 381 N.W.2d 858 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Altman v. Knox Lumber Co. 381 N.W.2d 858 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Coenen v. Buckman Building Corporation, 278 Minn. 193 , Peppin v. W.H.
Isker v. Gardner 360 N.W.2d 468 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Isker v. Gardner 360 N.W.2d 468 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Coenen v. Buckman Building Corporation, 278 Minn. 193
Wegscheider v. Plastics, Inc. 289 N.W.2d 167 Minn. 1980
Wegscheider v. Plastics, Inc. 289 N.W.2d 167 Minn. 1980
Evanson v. Jerowski, supra ; Parr v. Hamnes, 303 Minn. 333 , 228 * Coenen v. Buckman Building Corp., 278 Minn. 193
Beckman v. v. J. M. Enterprises, Inc. 269 N.W.2d 37 Minn. 1978
Beckman v. v. J. M. Enterprises, Inc. 269 N.W.2d 37 Minn. 1978
Coenen v. Buckman Building Corp., 278 Minn. 193 , provides as follows: “The knowledge required is actual knowledge as distinguished from constructive notice or knowledge.
Bigham v. J. C. Penney Co. 268 N.W.2d 892 Minn. 1978
Bigham v. J. C. Penney Co. 268 N.W.2d 892 Minn. 1978
508 , 9 L.Ed.2d 500 (1963); Lametti v. Peter Lametti Const. Co., 305 Minn. 72, 77 , Coenen v. Buckman Building Corp., 278 Minn. 193, 204
Lametti v. Peter Lametti Construction Co. 232 N.W.2d 435 Minn. 1975
Lametti v. Peter Lametti Construction Co. 232 N.W.2d 435 Minn. 1975
Coenen v. Buckman Building Corp. 278 Minn. 193 , Meulners v. Hawkes, 299 Minn. 76 , Springrose v. Willmore, 292 Minn. 23
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc. 232 N.W.2d 236 Minn. 1975
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc. 232 N.W.2d 236 Minn. 1975
Coenen v. Buckman Building Corp. 278 Minn. 193
Parr v. Hamnes 228 N.W.2d 234 Minn. 1975
Parr v. Hamnes 228 N.W.2d 234 Minn. 1975
Corp. 278 Minn. 193, 204 , : “In order to invoke the doctrine of assumption of risk, it is essential that the risk or danger shall have been known to, and appreciated by, plaintiff.
Reikow v. BITUMINOUS CONST. COMPANY, INC. 224 N.W.2d 921 Minn. 1974
Reikow v. BITUMINOUS CONST. COMPANY, INC. 224 N.W.2d 921 Minn. 1974
Corp. 278 Minn. 193, 199
Milloch v. Getty 220 N.W.2d 481 Minn. 1974
Milloch v. Getty 220 N.W.2d 481 Minn. 1974
Corp. 278 Minn. 193 , Schrader v. Kriesel, 232 Minn. 238
Carpenter v. Mattison 219 N.W.2d 625 Minn. 1974
Carpenter v. Mattison 219 N.W.2d 625 Minn. 1974
In order to sustain the contention that plaintiff assumed the risk in the latter sense, defendant must first meet the requirements of Coenen v. Buckman Building Corp. 278 Minn. 193, 204 , : “In order to invoke the doctrine of assumption of risk, it is essential that the risk or danger shall have been known to, and appreciated by, plaintiff.
Meulners v. Hawkes 216 N.W.2d 633 Minn. 1974
Meulners v. Hawkes 216 N.W.2d 633 Minn. 1974
Corp. 278 Minn. 193, 204 , we had occasion to comment on this distinction.
Olson v. Hansen 216 N.W.2d 124 Minn. 1974
Olson v. Hansen 216 N.W.2d 124 Minn. 1974
Corp. 278 Minn. 193 , Schrader v. Kriesel, 232 Minn. 238
Rude v. Larson 207 N.W.2d 709 Minn. 1973
Rude v. Larson 207 N.W.2d 709 Minn. 1973
Corp. 278 Minn. 193 , clearly supports the findings of the jury that defendant Larson was not negligent, that plaintiff, herself, was contributorily negligent, and that her losses resulted from her own negligence rather than any act of the broker, the decision of the trial court must be and is affirmed.
Krengel v. Midwest Automatic Photo, Inc. 203 N.W.2d 841 Minn. 1973
Krengel v. Midwest Automatic Photo, Inc. 203 N.W.2d 841 Minn. 1973
Coenen v. Buckman Building Corp. 278 Minn. *205 193, 198, Zuber v. N. P. Ry.
Matson v. Kivimaki 200 N.W.2d 164 Minn. 1972
Matson v. Kivimaki 200 N.W.2d 164 Minn. 1972
Coenen v. Buckman Building Corp. 278 Minn. 193, 197 , Mc *145 Cormack v. Hankscraft Co. Inc. 278 Minn. 322, 325
Conroy v. Kleinman Realty Co. 179 N.W.2d 162 Minn. 1970
Conroy v. Kleinman Realty Co. 179 N.W.2d 162 Minn. 1970
Corp. 278 Minn. 193 , 153 N. W. (2d) 329 .