Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Danek v. Meldrum Manufacturing & Engineering Co., 252 N.W.2d 255.

25 citing documents.

Ulstad v. Brenny 645 N.W.2d 767 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Ulstad v. Brenny 645 N.W.2d 767 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
& Eng’g Co., 312 Minn. 404, 408 , (seminal case on this subject)).
Meiske v. Lift-Stak & Stor, Inc. 599 N.W.2d 175 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Meiske v. Lift-Stak & Stor, Inc. 599 N.W.2d 175 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
& Eng’g Co., 312 Minn. 404, 407
Minnesota Brewing Co. v. Egan & Sons Co. 574 N.W.2d 54 Minn. 1998
Minnesota Brewing Co. v. Egan & Sons Co. 574 N.W.2d 54 Minn. 1998
& Engineering Co., Inc., 312 Minn. 404
Hallas v. Naegele Outdoor Advertising, Inc. 541 N.W.2d 594 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Hallas v. Naegele Outdoor Advertising, Inc. 541 N.W.2d 594 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
& Eng’g Co., 312 Minn. 404, 409
Hix v. Minnesota Workers' Compensation Assigned Risk Plan 520 N.W.2d 497 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Hix v. Minnesota Workers' Compensation Assigned Risk Plan 520 N.W.2d 497 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
and Eng’g Co., 312 Minn. 404, 409 , (defendant company had burden to prove worker consented to alleged special employment relationship thus causing the exclusion remedy of the Workers’ Compensation Act to apply).
Avila v. Northrup King Co. 880 P.2d 717 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 1 1994
Karst v. FC Hayer Co., Inc. 447 N.W.2d 180 Minn. 1989
Karst v. FC Hayer Co., Inc. 447 N.W.2d 180 Minn. 1989
& Eng’g Co., Inc., 312 Minn. 404, 413-14 , *185 (1977); Frank v. Anderson Bros., 236 Minn. 81, 85 , Breimhorst v. Beckman, 227 Minn. 409, 434-35
Smieja v. City of Browerville 406 N.W.2d 325 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Smieja v. City of Browerville 406 N.W.2d 325 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Under the “loaned servant” doctrine, as applied in Danek v. Meldrum Manufacturing & Engineering Co., 312 Minn. 404 , Smieja was found to be an employee of respondent School District at the time of the accident.
Henry v. Dolphin Temporary Help Services 386 N.W.2d 277 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Henry v. Dolphin Temporary Help Services 386 N.W.2d 277 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
The Smith court cited Danek v. Meldrum Manufacturing and Engineering Co., 312 Minn. 404 , reasoning: [0]nce a worker accepts a job assignment, as was the case in Danek , the temporary service is one of the employers for that job until it is completed.
Bilotta v. Labor Pool of St. Paul, Inc. 321 N.W.2d 888 Minn. 1982
Bilotta v. Labor Pool of St. Paul, Inc. 321 N.W.2d 888 Minn. 1982
1 Danek v. Meldrum Manufacturing and Engineering Co., 312 Minn. 404
Smith v. Employers' Overload Co. 314 N.W.2d 220 Minn. 1981
Smith v. Employers' Overload Co. 314 N.W.2d 220 Minn. 1981
and Eng’ring Co., 312 Minn. 404 , where we held that plaintiff was an employee of both the temporary labor service and the defendant company, and that plaintiff was therefore precluded by the “sole remedy” provision of the Workers’ Compensation Act from maintaining a tort action for personal injuries against defendant.
Newland v. Overland Express, Inc. 295 N.W.2d 615 Minn. 1980
Newland v. Overland Express, Inc. 295 N.W.2d 615 Minn. 1980
and Engineering Co., Inc., 312 Minn. 404
Miller v. Federated Mutual Insurance Co. 264 N.W.2d 631 Minn. 1978
Miller v. Federated Mutual Insurance Co. 264 N.W.2d 631 Minn. 1978
& Engineering Co. Inc., Minn., this court did not have occasion to apply the loaned-servant rule.