Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Stahlberg v. Moe, 166 N.W.2d 340.

26 citing documents.

opc7021302-040103.pdf Minn. Ct. App. 2023
opc7021302-040103.pdf Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Stahlberg v. Moe, 283 Minn. 78, 83
In re 3M Bair Hugger Litig. 924 N.W.2d 16 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In re 3M Bair Hugger Litig. 924 N.W.2d 16 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Stahlberg v. Moe , 283 Minn. 78 , , 345 (1969).
DeWitt v. London Road Rental Center, Inc. 899 N.W.2d 883 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
DeWitt v. London Road Rental Center, Inc. 899 N.W.2d 883 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
3 Once other possible causes have been sufficiently eliminated, the plaintiff is entitled to argue the res ipsa inference, the defendant is entitled to argue other causes, and the jury must determine “whether or not facts exist that will support the application of the res ipsa loquitur theory.” Olson, d at 709 ; see Stahlberg v. Moe, 283 Minn. 78, 83 , (“[W]here there is evidence of other possi *887 ble causes of plaintiffs injury-which would not involve a breach of duty on the part of the defen
Stelter v. Chiquita Processed Foods, L.L.C. 658 N.W.2d 242 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Stelter v. Chiquita Processed Foods, L.L.C. 658 N.W.2d 242 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Stahlberg v. Moe, 283 Minn. 78, 83
Anderson Ex Rel. Anderson v. City of Coon Rapids 491 N.W.2d 917 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Anderson Ex Rel. Anderson v. City of Coon Rapids 491 N.W.2d 917 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Stahlberg v. Moe, 283 Minn. 78, 85
Marshall v. Galvez 480 N.W.2d 358 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Marshall v. Galvez 480 N.W.2d 358 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
See, e.g., Stahlberg v. Moe, 283 Minn. 78, 84 , (reversing directed verdict for plaintiff on negligence issue; where more than one explanation for the injury existed and the jury could reasonably have accepted one of them, question of liability is for the jury); Teas v. Minneapolis St.
M.M.D. v. B.L.G. 467 N.W.2d 645 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Mmd v. Blg 467 N.W.2d 645 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
M.M.D. v. B.L.G. 467 N.W.2d 645 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
See Stahlberg v. Moe, 283 Minn. 78, 85 , W. Keeton, D. Dobbs, R. Keeton & D. Owen, Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts § 41, at 269 (5th ed. 1984) (hereinafter Prosser).
Mmd v. Blg 467 N.W.2d 645 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
See Stahlberg v. Moe, 283 Minn. 78, 85 , W. Keeton, D. Dobbs, R. Keeton & D. Owen, Prosser and Keeton on the Law of Torts § 41, at 269 (5th ed. 1984) (hereinafter Prosser).
Wolf v. State Farm Insurance Co. 450 N.W.2d 359 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Wolf v. State Farm Insurance Co. 450 N.W.2d 359 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
It asserts medical evidence was required because Wolf’s injuries involve “obscure and abstruse medical factors such that the ordinary layman cannot reasonably possess well-founded knowledge of the matter and could only indulge in speculation[.j” Stahlberg v. Moe, 283 Minn. 78, 85
Fleming v. Hallum 350 N.W.2d 417 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Fleming v. Hallum 350 N.W.2d 417 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Stahlberg v. Moe, 283 Minn. 78
Nemanic v. Gopher Heating & Sheet Metal, Inc. 337 N.W.2d 667 Minn. 1983
Nemanic v. Gopher Heating & Sheet Metal, Inc. 337 N.W.2d 667 Minn. 1983
Stahlberg v. Moe, 283 Minn. 78, 85 , Krueger v. Knutson, 261 Minn. 144, 158-59
Bernloehr v. Central Livestock Order Buying Co. 208 N.W.2d 753 Minn. 1973
Bernloehr v. Central Livestock Order Buying Co. 208 N.W.2d 753 Minn. 1973
Stahlberg v. Moe, 283 Minn. 78
Silver v. Redleaf 194 N.W.2d 271 Minn. 1972
Silver v. Redleaf 194 N.W.2d 271 Minn. 1972
Hoffman v. Naslund, supra; Stahlberg v. Moe, 283 Minn. 78, 85 , Miller v. Raaen, 273 Minn. 109, 120