Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 232 N.W.2d 236.

106 citing documents.

Jesus Cardenas, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., d 236, 239, 240-41 (Minn. 1975) (affirming the denial of motions for judgment 6 notwithstanding the verdict and for a new trial).
Minn. 2022
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc.
Soderberg v. Anderson 922 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 2019
Soderberg v. Anderson 922 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 2019
The closest we have come to discussing the application of implied primary assumption of risk to recreational downhill skiing was in Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc. , 305 Minn. 506
Eischen v. Crystal Valley Cooperative 835 N.W.2d 629 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Eischen v. Crystal Valley Cooperative 835 N.W.2d 629 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
rely “constructive notice or knowledge,” of “the particular risk or danger ” and not merely of “a general risk.” Wegscheider v. Plastics, Inc., (emphasis added) (quotation omitted) (“The mere fact that the plaintiff would, in the exercise of ordinary care, have known or appreciated the danger is not sufficient.” (quotation omitted)); cf. Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 509 , -41 (1975) (concluding that district court properly declined to submit to the jury defendant’s seeondary-assump
Peterson Ex Rel. Peterson v. Donahue 733 N.W.2d 790 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Distinguished Peterson Ex Rel. Peterson v. Donahue 733 N.W.2d 790 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
During his deposition, he was asked, “[I]t’s a known risk that you can collide with another skier?” and answered, ‘Yes.” He also answered, “Yes” when asked if he “knew before this day [of the accident] that falls or collisions and accidents and injuries are something that can happen with skiing[.]” Appellant relies on Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506 , but that case is readily distinguishable: it declined to apply assumption of the risk between skiers because the defendant did not “intr
Blatz v. Allina Health System 622 N.W.2d 376 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Blatz v. Allina Health System 622 N.W.2d 376 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 507
State v. Bakken 604 N.W.2d 106 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
State v. Bakken 604 N.W.2d 106 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
See Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 508 , (stating where resolution is based on assessment of credibility of witnesses whose demeanor can only be observed by jury and where trial court approved jury verdict, appellate court is obligated to affirm).
Sandborg v. Blue Earth County 601 N.W.2d 192 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Sandborg v. Blue Earth County 601 N.W.2d 192 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 507
Baker v. Ploetz 597 N.W.2d 347 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Baker v. Ploetz 597 N.W.2d 347 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
A motion for JNOY admits “every inference reasonably to be drawn from the evidence as well as the credibility of the testimony for the adverse party.” Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 507
Hentges v. Thomford 569 N.W.2d 424 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Hentges v. Thomford 569 N.W.2d 424 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 507
Canada by and Through Landy v. McCarthy 567 N.W.2d 496 Minn. 1997
Canada by and Through Landy v. McCarthy 567 N.W.2d 496 Minn. 1997
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 507
Berg v. Nelson 559 N.W.2d 722 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Berg v. Nelson 559 N.W.2d 722 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 507
Molenaar v. United Cattle Co. 553 N.W.2d 424 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Molenaar v. United Cattle Co. 553 N.W.2d 424 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 507
Cox v. Crown CoCo, Inc. 544 N.W.2d 490 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Cox v. Crown CoCo, Inc. 544 N.W.2d 490 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc. 305 Minn. 506, 507
HYLAND HILL NO. CONDO ASS'N v. Hyland 538 N.W.2d 479 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
HYLAND HILL NO. CONDO ASS'N v. Hyland 538 N.W.2d 479 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 507
Hyland Hill North Condominium Ass'n v. Hyland Hill Co. 538 N.W.2d 479 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Hyland Hill North Condominium Ass'n v. Hyland Hill Co. 538 N.W.2d 479 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 507
Wolfson v. City of St. Paul 535 N.W.2d 384 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Wolfson v. City of St. Paul 535 N.W.2d 384 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 507
Boubelik v. Liberty State Bank 527 N.W.2d 589 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Boubelik v. Liberty State Bank 527 N.W.2d 589 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
See Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 510 , (declining court's offer to provide curative instruction constituted waiver).
ServiceMaster of St. Cloud v. GAB Business Services, Inc. 530 N.W.2d 558 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
ServiceMaster of St. Cloud v. GAB Business Services, Inc. 530 N.W.2d 558 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, 305 Minn. 506, 507
Nimis v. St. Paul Turners 521 N.W.2d 54 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Nimis v. St. Paul Turners 521 N.W.2d 54 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
A motion for JNOV “admits every inference reasonably to be drawn from the evidence as well as the credibility of the testimony for the adverse party.” Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 507
Plate v. St. Mary's Help of Christians Church 520 N.W.2d 17 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Plate v. St. Mary's Help of Christians Church 520 N.W.2d 17 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Sufficiency of the Evidence On appeal from a denial of JNOY, the reviewing court considers the legal question of whether the evidence is “practically conclusive against the verdict.” Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 507
Mertes v. Estate of King 501 N.W.2d 660 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Mertes v. Estate of King 501 N.W.2d 660 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 508
Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. v. Brekke Fireplace Shoppe, Inc. 495 N.W.2d 216 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. v. Brekke Fireplace Shoppe, Inc. 495 N.W.2d 216 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 507
Janke v. Duluth & Northeastern Railroad 489 N.W.2d 545 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Janke v. Duluth & Northeastern Railroad 489 N.W.2d 545 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 507
Itasca County Social Services v. Pitzen 488 N.W.2d 8 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Itasca County Social Services v. Pitzen 488 N.W.2d 8 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 507
Benson v. NORTHERN GOPHER ENTERPRISES 446 N.W.2d 678 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Benson v. NORTHERN GOPHER ENTERPRISES 446 N.W.2d 678 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
festly and palpably contrary to the evidence,” (quoting Vanderweyst v. Langford, 303 Minn. 575, 576 , ); or one reasonable minds could not reach, or is contradicted by evidence "practically conclusive against the verdict.” Bischer at 733 (quoting Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 507 , ).

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by