Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Radzak v. Mercy Hospital, 190 N.W.2d 86.

25 citing documents.

Monson v. White Bear Mitsubishi 663 N.W.2d 534 Minn. 2003
Monson v. White Bear Mitsubishi 663 N.W.2d 534 Minn. 2003
E.g., Franke, d at 376 (vacating an award on stipulation); Radzak v. Mercy Hosp., 291 Minn. 189, 194-95 , (affirming a denial of compensation); Soderquist v. McGough Bros., 210 Minn. 123, 125 , 297 N.W.
Fox v. Micro MacHine, Inc. 462 N.W.2d 592 Minn. 1990
Fox v. Micro MacHine, Inc. 462 N.W.2d 592 Minn. 1990
Concluding that the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals had not abused its discretion in denying the employee’s petition, see Radzak v. Mercy Hospital, 291 Minn. 189, 194 , Minn.Stat.
Lockwood v. Independent School District No. 877 312 N.W.2d 924 Minn. 1981
Jackson v. Cedar Grove Construction Co. 284 N.W.2d 367 Minn. 1979
Jackson v. Cedar Grove Construction Co. 284 N.W.2d 367 Minn. 1979
Radzak v. Mercy Hospital, 291 Minn. 189
Pfeil v. Worthington Lady Elks Lodge No. 2287 260 N.W.2d 576 Minn. 1977
Pfeil v. Worthington Lady Elks Lodge No. 2287 260 N.W.2d 576 Minn. 1977
See, Radzak v. Mercy Hospital, 291 Minn. 189
Harrison v. Schafer Construction Co. 257 N.W.2d 336 Minn. 1977
Harrison v. Schafer Construction Co. 257 N.W.2d 336 Minn. 1977
Radzak v. Mercy Hospital, 291 Minn. 189, 192
DeMars v. Robinson King Floors, Inc. 256 N.W.2d 501 Minn. 1977
DeMars v. Robinson King Floors, Inc. 256 N.W.2d 501 Minn. 1977
621 (1932) and Radzak v. Mercy Hospital, 291 Minn. 189
Knoble v. Storer Realty Co. 255 N.W.2d 388 Minn. 1977
Knoble v. Storer Realty Co. 255 N.W.2d 388 Minn. 1977
An “award” has been held to be synonymous with “decision.” Radzak v. Mercy Hospital, 291 Minn. 189, 192
Hill v. Conroy Bros. Co., Inc. 237 N.W.2d 606 Minn. 1975
Hill v. Conroy Bros. Co., Inc. 237 N.W.2d 606 Minn. 1975
Radzak v. Mercy Hospital, 291 Minn. 189
Umbreit v. Quality Tool, Inc. 225 N.W.2d 10 Minn. 1975
Umbreit v. Quality Tool, Inc. 225 N.W.2d 10 Minn. 1975
Berard v. LaCoe, 286 Minn. 375 , Radzak v. Mercy Hospital, 291 Minn. 189 , Schwartz v. Talmo, 295 Minn. 356 , Tierney v. Tierney & Co. 176 Minn. 464 , Peterson v. Thief River Falls Welding Co. 245 Minn. 212
Wollschlager v. STANDARD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 220 N.W.2d 346 Minn. 1974
Wollschlager v. STANDARD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 220 N.W.2d 346 Minn. 1974
See, among numerous cases, Turner v. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis, 298 Minn. 161 , Walker v. Midwest Foods, 293 Minn. 460 , Radzak v. Mercy Hospital, 291 Minn. 189 , Mattson v. Abate, supra; Guptill v. Conlon Const. Co. 239 Minn. 185 , Elsenpeter v. Potvin, 213 Minn. 129
Turner v. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis 213 N.W.2d 414 Minn. 1973
Turner v. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis 213 N.W.2d 414 Minn. 1973
rsine v. Armour & Co. 225 Minn. 157 , 30 N. W. *167 2d 526 (1947); Dudansky v. L. H. Sault Const. Co. 244 Minn. 369 , Jacobson v. Uptown Transfer & Storage Co. 268 Minn. 336 , Jones v. Flour City Ornamental Iron Works, 271 Minn. 42 , Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287 , Radzak v. Mercy Hospital, 291 Minn. 189 , and Walker v. Midwest Foods, 293 Minn. 460
Mechling v. Jasper Stone Company 198 N.W.2d 561 Minn. 1972
Mechling v. Jasper Stone Company 198 N.W.2d 561 Minn. 1972
In this connection we should and do bear in mind the policy stated in Radzak v. Mercy Hospital, 291 Minn. 189, 192 , : “* * * [T]he Workmen’s Compensation Act is remedial and humanitarian in its purpose and is to be given a broad, liberal construction in favor of the interests of the claimant.” The legislature has given us some additional guidelines for interpretation of statutes in Minn. St.