Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Riley v. Lake, 203 N.W.2d 331.

44 citing documents.

Ednika Dabney, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“[I]f there is no credible evidence to excuse a failure to comply with a [traffic law], the prima facie case established by evidence of that failure has not been overcome.”
Lance G. Cariveau, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Generally, the jury should determine the apportionment of negligent fault between parties except for “rare cases” in which the evidence is undisputed and “the factfinder could come to only one conclusion.” see also Jack Frost, Inc. v. Engineered Bldg.
Melissa Regouski, as court-appointed Guardian and Conservator for Morgan Moeller, Ward and Protected Person, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Gertken v. Farmers Elevator of Kensington, Minnesota, Inc. 411 N.W.2d 550 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Hille v. County of Wright 400 N.W.2d 744 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Hille v. County of Wright 400 N.W.2d 744 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43, 58
Alden Wells Veterinarian Clinics, Inc. v. Wood 324 N.W.2d 181 Minn. 1982
Alden Wells Veterinarian Clinics, Inc. v. Wood 324 N.W.2d 181 Minn. 1982
The jury’s allocation of negligence will not be disturbed on appeal except in “those rare cases where there is no dispute in the evidence and the factfinder could come to only one conclusion.” (quoting Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43, 58 , ).
Parks v. Allis-Chalmers Corp. 289 N.W.2d 456 Minn. 1979
Parks v. Allis-Chalmers Corp. 289 N.W.2d 456 Minn. 1979
Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43 , ”
Buck v. Dibble 281 N.W.2d 724 Minn. 1979
Buck v. Dibble 281 N.W.2d 724 Minn. 1979
As in Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43 , the conclusion seems inescapable that either she did not look, as she testified she did, or else did not see an automobile in plain sight.
Sandhofer v. Abbott-Northwestern Hospital 283 N.W.2d 362 Minn. 1979
Sandhofer v. Abbott-Northwestern Hospital 283 N.W.2d 362 Minn. 1979
See, Steinhaus v. Adamson, 304 Minn. 14, 20 , Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43, 58
Woodrow v. Tobler 269 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 1978
Woodrow v. Tobler 269 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 1978
Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43, 58 , See, also, Steinhaus v. Adamson, 304 Minn. 14
Lamke v. Louden 269 N.W.2d 53 Minn. 1978
Lamke v. Louden 269 N.W.2d 53 Minn. 1978
In any event, the case before us is hardly one of “those rare cases where there is no dispute in the evidence and the factfinder could come to only one conclusion.” Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43, 58
Anunti v. Payette 268 N.W.2d 52 Minn. 1978
Anunti v. Payette 268 N.W.2d 52 Minn. 1978
Payette concedes “that he entered the intersection from a street controlled by a stop sign * * * ” but argues, relying on certain language in Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43 , *54 (1972), 1 that there was compelling- evidence to excuse that violation.
Otterness v. Horsley 263 N.W.2d 403 Minn. 1978
Sikes v. Garrett 262 N.W.2d 681 Minn. 1977
Duchene v. Wolstan 258 N.W.2d 601 Minn. 1977
Duchene v. Wolstan 258 N.W.2d 601 Minn. 1977
Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43
Martineau v. Nelson 247 N.W.2d 409 Minn. 1976
Martineau v. Nelson 247 N.W.2d 409 Minn. 1976
17 See, Campion v. Knutson, 307 Minn. 263, 269 , Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43, 58 , Martin v. Bussert, 292 Minn. 29
Glaesman v. Mercer 243 N.W.2d 328 Minn. 1976
Glaesman v. Mercer 243 N.W.2d 328 Minn. 1976
Plaintiff’s reliance on Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43 , is misplaced.
Karel v. Brown 241 N.W.2d 485 Minn. 1976
Karel v. Brown 241 N.W.2d 485 Minn. 1976
Our statement in Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43, 58 , is dispositive of this case: “At best it would seem that, unless the evidence is so conclusive that reasonable minds can come to only one conclusion, the question of the apportionment of causal negligence should be left to the jury.
Campion v. Knutson 239 N.W.2d 248 Minn. 1976
Campion v. Knutson 239 N.W.2d 248 Minn. 1976
The standard of review of a jury’s apportionment of causal negligence was set forth by this court in Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43
Ferguson v. Northern States Power Co. 239 N.W.2d 190 Minn. 1976
Ferguson v. Northern States Power Co. 239 N.W.2d 190 Minn. 1976
Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43 , Martin v. Bussert, 292 Minn. 29
Steinhaus v. Adamson 228 N.W.2d 865 Minn. 1975
Steinhaus v. Adamson 228 N.W.2d 865 Minn. 1975
Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43
Riley v. Lake 223 N.W.2d 413 Minn. 1974
Riley v. Lake 223 N.W.2d 413 Minn. 1974
Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43
Simchuck v. Fullerton 216 N.W.2d 683 Minn. 1974
Simchuck v. Fullerton 216 N.W.2d 683 Minn. 1974
Where there is no evidence to excuse a violation of the right-of-way statute, the court should hold the violator negligent as a matter of law.” Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43, 53
Bryant v. Larson 214 N.W.2d 359 Minn. 1974
Bryant v. Larson 214 N.W.2d 359 Minn. 1974
See, Martin v. Bussert, 292 Minn. 29 , Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43
Cooper v. Friesen 207 N.W.2d 742 Minn. 1973
Cooper v. Friesen 207 N.W.2d 742 Minn. 1973
Riley v. Lake, 295 Minn. 43, 58

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by