Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Phelps v. Blomberg Roseville Clinic, 253 N.W.2d 390.

35 citing documents.

Twin Town Properties, LLC, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“The trial court has a duty to suppress such evidence or testimony where counsel’s dereliction is inexcusable and res ults in unjust surprise and p rejudice to his opponent.” Phelps v. Blomberg Roseville Clinic , (quotation omitted).
Suncom, LLC v. Robert Feuling d/b/a West Side Liquors of Sartell, LLC, and West Side Liquors of Sartell, … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Suncom, LLC v. Robert Feuling d/b/a West Side Liquors of Sartell, LLC, and West Side Liquors of Sartell, … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
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
Although the attorneys disagree on what was disclosed about the anticipated content of Aimee Blatz’s testimony, it is *393 clear that Blatz had a continuing obligation to keep opponents “apprised of any changes in circumstances which make it necessary to call witnesses or to introduce evidence not previously disclosed.”
Boschee v. Duevel 530 N.W.2d 834 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Boschee v. Duevel 530 N.W.2d 834 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
(“failure to suppress is not an abuse of discretion where the opposing party does not seek a continuance”).
Sparta Sportsfabrikk v. NorTur, Inc. 407 N.W.2d 128 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Sparta Sportsfabrikk v. NorTur, Inc. 407 N.W.2d 128 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
[Fjailure to suppress is not an abuse of discretion where the opposing party does not seek a
VanHercke v. Eastvold 405 N.W.2d 902 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
VanHercke v. Eastvold 405 N.W.2d 902 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Norwest Bank Midland v. Shinnick 402 N.W.2d 818 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Norwest Bank Midland v. Shinnick 402 N.W.2d 818 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State ex rel. Spannaus v. Heimer 393 N.W.2d 687 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State ex rel. Spannaus v. Heimer 393 N.W.2d 687 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Paul and Pacific Railroad Co., (citing *692 ).
Dennie v. Metropolitan Medical Center 387 N.W.2d 401 Minn. 1986
Dennie v. Metropolitan Medical Center 387 N.W.2d 401 Minn. 1986
Paul & Pacific Railroad
Riewe v. Arnesen 381 N.W.2d 448 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Riewe v. Arnesen 381 N.W.2d 448 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
hen the failure to disclose is not willful, the trial court should consider alternative methods short of exclusion for preventing prejudice, e.g., granting a continuance and assessing costs against the offending party, Krech v. Erdman, 305 Minn. 215, 218 , or limiting the subject matter of the testimony to matters already disclosed
Rediske v. Minnesota Valley Breeder's Ass'n 374 N.W.2d 745 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Rediske v. Minnesota Valley Breeder's Ass'n 374 N.W.2d 745 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
for rev. denied (Minn.April 18, 1985), pet.
Whitney v. Buttrick 376 N.W.2d 274 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Whitney v. Buttrick 376 N.W.2d 274 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Lane Ex Rel. Lane v. Skyline Family Medical Center 363 N.W.2d 318 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Lane Ex Rel. Lane v. Skyline Family Medical Center 363 N.W.2d 318 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Quill v. Trans World Airlines, Inc. 361 N.W.2d 438 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Quill v. Trans World Airlines, Inc. 361 N.W.2d 438 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Newmaster v. Mahmood 361 N.W.2d 130 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Newmaster v. Mahmood 361 N.W.2d 130 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
hen the failure to disclose is not willful,,the trial court should consider alternative methods short of exclusion for preventing prejudice, e.g., granting a continuance and assessing costs against the offending party, Krech v. Erdman, 305 Minn. 215, 218 , or limiting the subject matter of the testimony to matters already disclosed
Matter of Estate of Olsen 357 N.W.2d 407 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Matter of Estate of Olsen 357 N.W.2d 407 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Ford v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad 294 N.W.2d 844 Minn. 1980
Ford v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railroad 294 N.W.2d 844 Minn. 1980
Cornfeldt v. Tongen 262 N.W.2d 684 Minn. 1977
Cornfeldt v. Tongen 262 N.W.2d 684 Minn. 1977
hen the failure to disclose was not willful, courts should consider alternative methods short of exclusion for preventing prejudice, e. g., granting a continuance and assessing costs against the offending party, Krech v. Erdman, 305 Minn. 215, 218 , or limiting the subject matter of the testimony to matters already disclosed, Phelps v. Blomberg Roseville Clinic, Minn.