Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Hammerschmidt v. Moore, 274 N.W.2d 79.

27 citing documents.

David L. Phillips, Jr., Plaintiff, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud 813 N.W.2d 68 Minn. 2012
In Re Individual 35w Bridge Litigation 786 N.W.2d 890 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
In Re Individual 35w Bridge Litigation 786 N.W.2d 890 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
e Gustafson v. Johnson, 235 Minn. 358, 364 , failure to provide statutory notice to a municipal co-tortfeasor, see White v. Johnson, 272 Minn. 363, 372 , overruled on other grounds [;] Tolbert v. Gerber Industries, Inc., -68 (1977); and failure to provide statutory notice to a dramshop defendant
Oslund v. Johnson 567 N.W.2d 89 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Oslund v. Johnson 567 N.W.2d 89 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
2 The parties agree that the provisions quoted above were added to the statute in 1982 3 holding that a defendant licensee’s contribution claim against another licensee was not precluded because the victim had failed-to notify that licensee.
Blomgren v. Marshall Management Services, Inc. 483 N.W.2d 504 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Blomgren v. Marshall Management Services, Inc. 483 N.W.2d 504 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
4 Grothe v. Shaffer, 305 Minn. 17, 23-4 , Gustafson v. Johnson, 235 Minn. 358, 364 , (stating a joint “tortfeasor who has been *507 sued ‘has the right to implead the unjoined tortfeasor in plaintiffs action for the purpose of proving their common liability even after the statute of limitations on plaintiffs claim has run’ ”); White, 272 Minn. at 371 , d at 679 (running of sta
Moose Club v. LaBounty 442 N.W.2d 334 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Moose Club v. LaBounty 442 N.W.2d 334 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Paul, Minneapolis & Omaha Railroad Co., 235 Minn. 304, 308 , (covenant not to sue); Gustafson v. Johnson, 235 Minn. 358, 364 , (failure to bring a claim within the statute of limitations); (failure to provide notice in dram shop action).
Bulau v. Hector Plumbing and Heating Co. 387 N.W.2d 659 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Bulau v. Hector Plumbing and Heating Co. 387 N.W.2d 659 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
it held that the 120-day notice requirement in the dram shop law did not apply to third-party actions.
In Re Estate of Morse 364 N.W.2d 842 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
In Re Estate of Morse 364 N.W.2d 842 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Horton Ex Rel. Horton v. Orbeth, Inc. 342 N.W.2d 112 Minn. 1984
Pautz v. Cal-Ros, Inc. 340 N.W.2d 338 Minn. 1983
Pautz v. Cal-Ros, Inc. 340 N.W.2d 338 Minn. 1983
Calder v. City of Crystal 318 N.W.2d 838 Minn. 1982
Calder v. City of Crystal 318 N.W.2d 838 Minn. 1982
Vesely, Otto, Miller & Keefe v. Blake 311 N.W.2d 3 Minn. 1981
Vesely, Otto, Miller & Keefe v. Blake 311 N.W.2d 3 Minn. 1981
Appellants rely on several Minnesota cases which have recognized the principle that neither an injured party’s failure to sue a tortfeasor within the statute of limitations, e.g., Gustafson v. Johnson, 235 Minn. 358 , nor an injured party’s failure to provide statutory notice of a claim against a tortfeasor, White v. Johnson, 272 Minn. 363 , overruled in part, precludes contribution against that tortfeasor.
Jones v. Fisher 309 N.W.2d 726 Minn. 1981
Jones v. Fisher 309 N.W.2d 726 Minn. 1981
see Gustafson v. Johnson, 235 Minn. 358, 364 , failure to provide statutory notice to a municipal co-tort-feasor, see White v. Johnson, 272 Minn. 363, 372 , overruled on other grounds; Tolbert v. Gerber Industries, Inc., -68 (1977); and failure to provide statutory notice to a dramshop defendant
Wegan v. Village of Lexington 309 N.W.2d 273 Minn. 1981
Wegan v. Village of Lexington 309 N.W.2d 273 Minn. 1981
Even though no notice of claim was ever filed with Circle Pines, nor any action commenced within three years, the third-party claim was proper because of this court’s discussed in Note, Contribution & Indemnity — An Examination of the Upheaval in Minnesota Tort Loss Allocation Concepts, 5 Wm.
Leisure Dynamics, Inc. v. Falstaff Brewing Corp. 298 N.W.2d 33 Minn. 1980
Leisure Dynamics, Inc. v. Falstaff Brewing Corp. 298 N.W.2d 33 Minn. 1980