Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Kinikin v. Heupel, 305 N.W.2d 589.

33 citing documents.

Cathy J. Foy, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Jacob Becker, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Haile v. Sutherland 598 N.W.2d 424 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Haile v. Sutherland 598 N.W.2d 424 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
780 , 558 P.2d 975, 979-80 (1976) (reversing directed *429 verdict for physician where patient consented to right hip prosthesis but received total hip replacement); Pizzalotto v. Wilson, 437 So.2d 859, 865 (La.1983) (finding physician committed battery where patient consented to exploratory surgery, and physician removed reproductive organs); (permitting submission of battery claim where patient consented - to breast reduction and received mastectomy); Mohr v. Williams, 95 Minn. 261, 269-70 , 1
K.A.C. v. Benson 527 N.W.2d 553 Minn. 1995
K.A.C. v. Benson 527 N.W.2d 553 Minn. 1995
Carlson v. Mutual Service Casualty Insurance Co. 527 N.W.2d 580 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Carlson v. Mutual Service Casualty Insurance Co. 527 N.W.2d 580 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
R.R., (remittitur); (same).
Sayers Ex Rel. Sayers v. Beltrami County 472 N.W.2d 656 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Dallum v. Farmers Union Central Exchange, Inc. 462 N.W.2d 608 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Dallum v. Farmers Union Central Exchange, Inc. 462 N.W.2d 608 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
McNeill & Associates, Inc. v. ITT Life Insurance Corp. 446 N.W.2d 181 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
McNeill & Associates, Inc. v. ITT Life Insurance Corp. 446 N.W.2d 181 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Kath v. Burlington Northern Railroad 441 N.W.2d 569 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Kath v. Burlington Northern Railroad 441 N.W.2d 569 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
McCarthy Well Co. v. St. Peter Creamery, Inc. 389 N.W.2d 514 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
McCarthy Well Co. v. St. Peter Creamery, Inc. 389 N.W.2d 514 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Omlid v. Lee 391 N.W.2d 62 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Omlid v. Lee 391 N.W.2d 62 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Kohoutek v. Hafner 383 N.W.2d 295 Minn. 1986
Kohoutek v. Hafner 383 N.W.2d 295 Minn. 1986
-94 (Minn.1981), we noted that the submission of both a battery and a negligent nondisclosure claim may be redundant and may result in an inconsistent verdict.
Gum v. Medcalf Orthopaedic Appliance Co. 380 N.W.2d 916 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Gum v. Medcalf Orthopaedic Appliance Co. 380 N.W.2d 916 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Minnesota Rule of Civil Procedure 59.01(5) provides for a new trial for “[ejxcessive or insufficient damages, ap *922 pearing to have been given under the influence of passion or prejudice.” To be excessive, the damages award “must so greatly exceed what is adequate as to be accountable on no other basis than passion and prejudice.”
Clark v. Miller 378 N.W.2d 838 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Clark v. Miller 378 N.W.2d 838 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Kalsbeck v. Westview Clinic, P.A. 375 N.W.2d 861 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Kalsbeck v. Westview Clinic, P.A. 375 N.W.2d 861 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
where the court applied the Corn-feldt standard, it held that, besides risks of death or serious bodily harm, the doctor must also reveal risks “which a skilled practitioner in good standing in the community would reveal.” None of the experts who testified at trial gave their opinion on whether such
Kohoutek v. Hafner 366 N.W.2d 633 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Kohoutek v. Hafner 366 N.W.2d 633 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
ANALYSIS I At trial, the doctors and hospital argued the supreme court’s indicating that battery and negligent nondisclosure may be redundant theories of liability, precluded the submission of both' theories in this case.
Lawin v. City of Long Prairie 355 N.W.2d 764 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Lawin v. City of Long Prairie 355 N.W.2d 764 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
“The decision to remit a verdict is for the trial court in the first instance, and its action will not be reversed unless its discretion is improperly exercised.”
Plutshack Ex Rel. Plutshack v. University of Minnesota Hospitals 316 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 1982
Plutshack Ex Rel. Plutshack v. University of Minnesota Hospitals 316 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 1982
Moreover, we note, quoting Canterbury v. Spence, 464 F.2d 772, 783 (D.C.Cir.), cert.