Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Milkovich v. Saari, 203 N.W.2d 408.

93 citing documents.

Zaretsky v. Molecular Biosystems, Inc. 464 N.W.2d 546 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
In Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155 , the supreme court adopted a five-factor methodology of analysis for selecting the applicable substantive rule in a conflict-of-law situation.
Gimmestad v. Gimmestad 451 N.W.2d 662 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Gimmestad v. Gimmestad 451 N.W.2d 662 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155, 161
Wille v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. 432 N.W.2d 784 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Wille v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. 432 N.W.2d 784 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
The second step requires the court to examine five factors, namely: 1) predictability of results; 2) maintenance of interstate and international order; 3) simplification of the judicial task; 4) advancement of the forum’s governmental interest; 5) application of the better rule of law Hime, d at 833 (quoting Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155 , ).
Lindquist v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 415 N.W.2d 28 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Hodges v. Hodges 415 N.W.2d 62 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Hodges v. Hodges 415 N.W.2d 62 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155, 164 , citing Schneider v. Nichols, 280 Minn. 139 , (adopting the “better-law” concept).
Lindquist v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 415 N.W.2d 28 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
B. Application of Choice-of-Law Rules Having determined that the application of Minnesota law would not offend due process, the next step is to apply the choice-of-law rules set forth in Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155 , to determine whether Minnesota or Tennessee law governs.
Gate City Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. O'Connor 410 N.W.2d 448 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Gate City Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n v. O'Connor 410 N.W.2d 448 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
In Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155 , the Minnesota Supreme Court adopted an analysis for determination of the applicable law.
Matter of Discipline of Hoffman 379 N.W.2d 514 Minn. 1986
Matter of Discipline of Hoffman 379 N.W.2d 514 Minn. 1986
Alaska law is an appropriate choice of law to govern these fee agreements under the factors set out by this court in Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155
Hoeschen v. South Carolina Insurance Co. 378 N.W.2d 796 Minn. 1985
Hoeschen v. South Carolina Insurance Co. 378 N.W.2d 796 Minn. 1985
633 , 66 L.Ed.2d 521 (1981) in which this court found sufficient contacts to permit the application of Minnesota law and then examined the five choice-influencing considerations enunciated in Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155
Standal v. Armstrong Cork Co. 356 N.W.2d 380 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Standal v. Armstrong Cork Co. 356 N.W.2d 380 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155, 161
Hoffman v. Henderson 355 N.W.2d 322 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Hoffman v. Henderson 355 N.W.2d 322 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
To determine choice of law, our Supreme Court in Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155 , rejected the doctrine of lex loci in favor of the more flexible factor-oriented reasoning provided by Leflar, Choice Influencing Considerations in Conflicts Law, 41 N.Y.U.L.
DeRemer v. Pacific Intermountain Express Co. 353 N.W.2d 694 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
DeRemer v. Pacific Intermountain Express Co. 353 N.W.2d 694 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
In Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155 , the court adopted the choice-of-law methodology first enunciated by Professor Robert Leflar in his article Choice-Influencing Considerations in Conflicts Law, 41 N.Y.U.L.Rev.
Milbank Mutual Insurance Co. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. 332 N.W.2d 160 Minn. 1983
Milbank Mutual Insurance Co. v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. 332 N.W.2d 160 Minn. 1983
Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155, 161-64 , -13 (1973).
Davis v. Furlong 328 N.W.2d 150 Minn. 1983
Davis v. Furlong 328 N.W.2d 150 Minn. 1983
In Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155 , we abandoned the mechanical lex loci rule for selecting the applicable substantive rule in a conflict-of-law situation.
Bigelow v. Halloran 313 N.W.2d 10 Minn. 1981
Bigelow v. Halloran 313 N.W.2d 10 Minn. 1981
The trial court held, under our decision in Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155 , that Iowa’s survival statute, Iowa Code § 611.20 , is applicable thus allowing the survival of plaintiff’s cause of action.
Matter of Estate of Congdon 309 N.W.2d 261 Minn. 1981
Matter of Estate of Congdon 309 N.W.2d 261 Minn. 1981
19 In Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155, 161 , this court adopted a method for resolving conflict of laws questions.
Hague v. Allstate Insurance Co. 289 N.W.2d 43 Minn. 1979
Hague v. Allstate Insurance Co. 289 N.W.2d 43 Minn. 1979
3 In Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155 , this court adopted a methodology of analysis for resolving conflicts of.
Hime v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 284 N.W.2d 829 Minn. 1979
Hime v. State Farm Fire & Casualty Co. 284 N.W.2d 829 Minn. 1979
Having concluded that due process would not be violated by application of Min *833 nesota law, we apply our choice of law rules set forth in Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155 , to determine which law governs in this case.
Follese v. Eastern Airlines 271 N.W.2d 824 Minn. 1978
Follese v. Eastern Airlines 271 N.W.2d 824 Minn. 1978
Our approach to the problem presented therefore is not whether Minnesota has jurisdiction to the exclusion of Florida or whether our state’s interest or contacts are greater or more significant than are Florida’s or those of any other state having an interest measured by conventional choice-of-law tests employed in cases such as Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155
Blamey Ex Rel. Blamey v. Brown 270 N.W.2d 884 Minn. 1978
Blamey Ex Rel. Blamey v. Brown 270 N.W.2d 884 Minn. 1978
The factors to be considered in resolving this conflict were adopted in Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155
Myers v. Government Employees Insurance Co. 225 N.W.2d 238 Minn. 1974
Myers v. Government Employees Insurance Co. 225 N.W.2d 238 Minn. 1974
The trial court’s decision and appellant’s brief were filed prior to our decision in Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155
Schwartz v. Consolidated Freightways Corp. of Del. 221 N.W.2d 665 Minn. 1974
Schwartz v. Consolidated Freightways Corp. of Del. 221 N.W.2d 665 Minn. 1974
Plaintiff places principal reliance on this court’s decision in Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155
Alside, Inc. v. Larson 220 N.W.2d 274 Minn. 1974
Alside, Inc. v. Larson 220 N.W.2d 274 Minn. 1974
“A. I’m hired to get business, yes; I was trying to get business.” 2 See, Leflar, American Conflicts Law, § 103, p. 239; cf. Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by