Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Williamson v. Cain, 245 N.W.2d 242.

67 citing documents.

Richard Joseph Terfehr v. Buffalo-Red River Watershed District, Wilkin ... Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Richard Joseph Terfehr v. Buffalo-Red River Watershed District, Wilkin ... Minn. Ct. App. 2026
MFK by and through her natural parent, Kathryn Kendrick v. Walker-Hackensack-Akeley ISD 113, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
MFK by and through her natural parent, Kathryn Kendrick v. Walker-Hackensack-Akeley ISD 113, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
No. 314, to argue that CL’s conduct here was ministerial, we are not persuaded.
James W. Honcik, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Jaime Lindbom as Guardian Ad Litem for Emma Lindbom v. Becker Independent School District, 726, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Jaime Lindbom as Guardian Ad Litem for Emma Lindbom v. Becker Independent School District, 726, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“[T]he discretionary-ministerial distinction is a nebulous and difficult one because almost any act involves some measure of freedom of choice as well as some measure of perfunctory execution.” (per curiam).
Cody Lee Elven, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
While th ey undoubtedly had to make certain decisions in doing that job, the nature, quality, and complexity of their decision- making process does not entitle th em to immunity from suit.”
Andrew Ellis, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
as “clearly ministerial”); Anderson, d at 657-59 (holding that unwritten protocol imposed ministerial duty on high -school teacher concernin g safe operation of table saw); , 316 (Minn. 1998) (holding that city ordinance imposed ministerial duty on sidewalk inspector to immediately repair broken sidewalk slabs); Williamson v. Cain , (holding that state em ployees demolishing abandoned house were not entitled to immunity even though job required some degree of decision-making).
Wade Sotona and Kristine Sotona, as co-trustees for the next-of-kin of Brody Sotona, decedent, Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
when there is a clear and unreasonable danger to the Trooper, fleeing motorist, or other persons.” A ministerial duty is a duty that is “absolute, certain, and imperative, involving merely the execution of a specific duty arising from fixed and designated facts.” Anderson, d at 6 56 (quotation omitted); see also Williamson v. Cain , 310 Minn. 59, 61, (characterizing a ministerial duty as being “simple and definite”).
Steven Igou v. Garden City Township Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Steven Igou v. Garden City Township Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[T]he discretionary-ministerial distinction is a nebulous and difficult one because almost any act involves some measure of freedom of choice as well as some measure of perfunctory execution.” Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59, 61
Delmer v. Fladwood v. City of St. Paul Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Delmer v. Fladwood v. City of St. Paul Minn. Ct. App. 2016
The supreme court’s opinion in Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59, is instructive in identifying the conduct at issue.
Juan Edward Shariss v. City of Bloomington 852 N.W.2d 278 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Juan Edward Shariss v. City of Bloomington 852 N.W.2d 278 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
er after sunset without activating lights was “clearly ministerial”); Anderson, d at 657-59 (holding that unwritten protocol imposed ministerial duty on high school teacher concerning safe operation of table saw); Wiederholt, d at 316 (holding that city ordinance imposed ministerial duty on sidewalk inspector to immediately repair broken sidewalk slabs); Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59, 61, (holding that state employees demolishing abandoned house were not entitled to immunity even though the j
Vassallo ex rel. Brown v. Majeski 842 N.W.2d 456 Minn. 2014
JW Ex Rel. BRW v. 287 INTER. DIST. 761 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
J.W. ex rel. B.R.W. v. 287 Intermediate District 761 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
JW Ex Rel. BRW v. 287 INTER. DIST. 761 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
165, 167 (1937) (quotation omitted); see, e.g., Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59, 61 , (dismantling an abandoned house a ministerial duty).
J.W. ex rel. B.R.W. v. 287 Intermediate District 761 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
165, 167 (1937) (quotation omitted); see, e.g., Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59, 61 , (dismantling an abandoned house a ministerial duty).
Schroeder v. St. Louis County 708 N.W.2d 497 Minn. 2006
Schroeder v. St. Louis County 708 N.W.2d 497 Minn. 2006
We find our decision in Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59 , to be instructive.
Anderson v. Anoka Hennepin Independent School District 11 678 N.W.2d 651 Minn. 2004
Anderson v. Anoka Hennepin Independent School District 11 678 N.W.2d 651 Minn. 2004
(concluding that implementation of case plan developed by individual social worker ministerial); Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59, 61 , (finding demolition of house ministerial); Larson, d at 121 (concluding that spotting and teaching a student’s gymnastic exercise ministerial).
Anderson v. Anoka Hennepin Independent School District 11 655 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Anderson v. Anoka Hennepin Independent School District 11 655 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59, 61
Fear v. Independent School District 911 634 N.W.2d 204 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Fear v. Independent School District 911 634 N.W.2d 204 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
See Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59, 61 , (ruling that tearing down house was ministerial, despite making independent decisions relating to job).
S.W. v. Spring Lake Park School District No. 16 592 N.W.2d 870 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
S.W. v. Spring Lake Park School District No. 16 592 N.W.2d 870 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Williamson v. *876 Cain, 310 Minn. 59, 61 , (ruling that tearing down a house was ministerial, despite the exercise of independent decisions).
Wiederholt v. City of Minneapolis 581 N.W.2d 312 Minn. 1998
Wiederholt v. City of Minneapolis 581 N.W.2d 312 Minn. 1998
See Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59, 61
S.W. v. Spring Lake Park School District No. 16 566 N.W.2d 366 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
S.W. v. Spring Lake Park School District No. 16 566 N.W.2d 366 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
165, 167 (1937)); see, e.g., Larson, d at 120-21 (supervising and teaching gymnastic exercises are ministerial duties); Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59, 61 , *373 (1976) (dismantling abandoned house is ministerial duty).
Johnson v. State 553 N.W.2d 40 Minn. 1996
Johnson v. State 553 N.W.2d 40 Minn. 1996
Dish No. m, -21 (Minn.1979) (supervising and teaching a gymnastics exercise a ministerial duty); Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59 , (dismantling an abandoned house a ministerial duty).
Ireland v. Crow's Nest Yachts, Inc. 552 N.W.2d 269 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Ireland v. Crow's Nest Yachts, Inc. 552 N.W.2d 269 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59, 61
Duellman v. Erwin 522 N.W.2d 377 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Duellman v. Erwin 522 N.W.2d 377 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
An act is ministerial when it is “absolute, certain and imperative, involving merely the execution of a specific duty arising from fixed and designated facts.” Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59, 61 , (quoting People v. May, 251 Ill.
S.L.D. v. Kranz 498 N.W.2d 47 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
S.L.D. v. Kranz 498 N.W.2d 47 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Id.; see also Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59, 61
Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission v. County of Hennepin 451 N.W.2d 319 Minn. 1990
Metropolitan Sports Facilities Commission v. County of Hennepin 451 N.W.2d 319 Minn. 1990
Cf. Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59, 61
Snyder v. City of Minneapolis 422 N.W.2d 747 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Snyder v. City of Minneapolis 422 N.W.2d 747 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59, 61 , (quoting Cook v. Trovatten, 200 Minn. 221, 224 , 274 N.W.
Elwood v. County of Rice 423 N.W.2d 671 Minn. 1988
Elwood v. County of Rice 423 N.W.2d 671 Minn. 1988
165, 167 (1937), this court explained that “[official duty is ministerial when it is absolute, certain and imperative, involving merely the execution of a specific duty arising from fixed and designated facts.” Applying this principle, state employees did not perform a discretionary act when they removed an abandoned house with a tractor in Williamson v. Cain, 310 Minn. 59, 61
Nusbaum v. County of Blue Earth 422 N.W.2d 713 Minn. 1988