Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc., 262 N.W.2d 349.

101 citing documents.

Mashlan v. E.M. Trucks, Inc. 443 N.W.2d 226 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc.
Westbrook State Bank v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. 437 N.W.2d 738 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Westbrook State Bank v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. 437 N.W.2d 738 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc.
Marriage of Mahoney v. Mahoney 433 N.W.2d 115 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Marriage of Mahoney v. Mahoney 433 N.W.2d 115 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
See Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc.
Popp v. County of Winona 430 N.W.2d 19 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Popp v. County of Winona 430 N.W.2d 19 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc.
Traver v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. 418 N.W.2d 727 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Traver v. Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance Co. 418 N.W.2d 727 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
at 736 ; see Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc.
Sender v. Minnesota Lawyers Mutual Insurance Co. 415 N.W.2d 364 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Sender v. Minnesota Lawyers Mutual Insurance Co. 415 N.W.2d 364 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc.
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
Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc., A.J.
Marriage of Driscoll v. Driscoll 414 N.W.2d 441 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Driscoll v. Driscoll 414 N.W.2d 441 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc., A.J.
Demning v. Grain Dealers Mutual Insurance 411 N.W.2d 571 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Demning v. Grain Dealers Mutual Insurance 411 N.W.2d 571 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
The other case cited, Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc., was a breach of warranty case arising out of the sale of an automobile.
Marriage of Salstrom v. Salstrom 404 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Marriage of Salstrom v. Salstrom 404 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
(citing Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc., and A.J.
State, Department of Public Safety v. Van Bus Delivery Co. 400 N.W.2d 759 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State, Department of Public Safety v. Van Bus Delivery Co. 400 N.W.2d 759 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
When reviewing a district court decision on a question of law, the appellate court, “need not defer to the ultimate conclusion drawn by the trial court.” Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc.
Wilkie v. Allied Van Lines, Inc. 398 N.W.2d 607 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Wilkie v. Allied Van Lines, Inc. 398 N.W.2d 607 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
See Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc.
Dehn v. Commissioner of Public Safety 394 N.W.2d 272 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Dehn v. Commissioner of Public Safety 394 N.W.2d 272 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
See Durfee v. Red Baxter Imports, Inc.
State v. Ford 377 N.W.2d 62 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Ford 377 N.W.2d 62 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc.
Marriage of Sand v. Sand 379 N.W.2d 119 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Marriage of Desjarlait v. Desjarlait 379 N.W.2d 139 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Marriage of Sand v. Sand 379 N.W.2d 119 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc., A.J.
Marriage of Desjarlait v. Desjarlait 379 N.W.2d 139 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
See Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc.
Emporium of Jazz v. City of Mendota 374 N.W.2d 825 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Emporium of Jazz v. City of Mendota 374 N.W.2d 825 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc.
State v. Herem 371 N.W.2d 40 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Herem 371 N.W.2d 40 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
citing Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc., A.J.
Noble v. C.E.D.O., Inc. 374 N.W.2d 734 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Noble v. C.E.D.O., Inc. 374 N.W.2d 734 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc., A.J.
Holland v. Dick Youngberg Chevrolet-Buick, Inc. 348 N.W.2d 770 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Holland v. Dick Youngberg Chevrolet-Buick, Inc. 348 N.W.2d 770 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Minor defects not substantially interfering with the truck’s operation and economy are not substantial impairments.” See Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc.
Van De Loo v. Van De Loo 346 N.W.2d 173 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Van De Loo v. Van De Loo 346 N.W.2d 173 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc., A.J.
Peterson v. Bendix Home Systems, Inc. 318 N.W.2d 50 Minn. 1982
Peterson v. Bendix Home Systems, Inc. 318 N.W.2d 50 Minn. 1982
*56 A. First of all, Bendix says Mrs. Peterson-should not be able to keep the mobile home in addition to her money damages and cites Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc., and Jacobs v. Rosemount Dodge-Winnebago South,.
Seekings v. Jimmy GMC of Tucson, Inc. 638 P.2d 210 Ariz. 1981
Superwood Corp. v. Siempelkamp Corp. 311 N.W.2d 159 Minn. 1981
Superwood Corp. v. Siempelkamp Corp. 311 N.W.2d 159 Minn. 1981
§ 336.2-318 (1980), and because this court has consistently avoided privity limitations, see Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc., noted in 5 Wm.
Jacobs v. Rosemount Dodge-Winnebago South 310 N.W.2d 71 Minn. 1981
Jacobs v. Rosemount Dodge-Winnebago South 310 N.W.2d 71 Minn. 1981
§ 336.2-719(2) (1980), which provides: “Where circumstances cause an exclusive or limited remedy to fail of its essential purpose, remedy may be had as provided by this chapter.” In Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc., we found that “[a]n exclusive remedy fails of its essential purpose if circumstances arise to deprive the limiting clause of its meaning or one party of the substantial value of its bargain.” d at 356 .
Seekings v. Jimmy GMC of Tucson, Inc. 638 P.2d 223 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1981
Johannsen v. Minnesota Valley Ford Tractor Co. 304 N.W.2d 654 Minn. 1981