Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Jacobs v. Rosemount Dodge-Winnebago South, 310 N.W.2d 71.

66 citing documents.

TestResources, Inc., Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Minn. 2020
2 (2014), is objective); Jacobs v. Rosemount Dodge-Winnebago S. , (evaluating “reasonable time” under Minn. St at.
Ricky Johnson, d/b/a Rick Johnson’s Deer and Beaver, Inc., Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Generally, a plaintiff ha s the burden of prov ing the existence of damages “to a reasonable certainty” and the amount of these damages to a “reasonable probability.” Jacobs v. Rosemount Dodge-Winnebago S.
Kelly v. City of Minneapolis 598 N.W.2d 657 Minn. 1999
Kelly v. City of Minneapolis 598 N.W.2d 657 Minn. 1999
An answer to a special verdict question should be set aside only if it is “perverse and palpably contrary to the evidence, or where the evidence is so clear as to leave no room for differences among reasonable persons.”
Barrera v. Muir 553 N.W.2d 104 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Barrera v. Muir 553 N.W.2d 104 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
International Financial Services, Inc. v. Franz 534 N.W.2d 261 Minn. 1995
International Financial Services, Inc. v. Franz 534 N.W.2d 261 Minn. 1995
and Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc.
International Financial Services, Inc. v. Franz 515 N.W.2d 379 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
International Financial Services, Inc. v. Franz 515 N.W.2d 379 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Durfee v. Rod Baxter Imports, Inc.
Church of the Nativity of Our Lord v. WatPro, Inc. 491 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 1992
Church of the Nativity of Our Lord v. WatPro, Inc. 491 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 1992
”[A]n answer to a special verdict question will be set aside [on review] only if perverse and palpably contrary to the evidence, or where the evidence is so clear as to leave no room for differences among reasonable persons.”
In Re the Redetermination of Benefits of Nicollet County Ditch 86A 488 N.W.2d 482 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
In Re the Redetermination of Benefits of Nicollet County Ditch 86A 488 N.W.2d 482 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Church of Nativity of Our Lord v. Watpro, Inc. 474 N.W.2d 605 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Church of Nativity of Our Lord v. Watpro, Inc. 474 N.W.2d 605 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
engaged in a joint venture with respect to marketing and manufacture of flagon material will be set aside only where it is “perverse and palpably contrary to the evidence.”
Feges v. Perkins Restaurants, Inc. 465 N.W.2d 75 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Feges v. Perkins Restaurants, Inc. 465 N.W.2d 75 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
The answer to a special verdict question will be set aside “only if perverse and palpably contrary to the evidence.”
Hydra-Mac, Inc. v. Onan Corp. 450 N.W.2d 913 Minn. 1990
Hydra-Mac, Inc. v. Onan Corp. 450 N.W.2d 913 Minn. 1990
Jacobs v. Rosemount Dodge — Winnebago S.
Ferguson v. Orr 427 N.W.2d 732 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Ferguson v. Orr 427 N.W.2d 732 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Reedon of Faribault, Inc. v. Fidelity & Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. 418 N.W.2d 488 Minn. 1988
Reedon of Faribault, Inc. v. Fidelity & Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. 418 N.W.2d 488 Minn. 1988
See, e.g., Jacobs v. Rosemount Dodge— Winnebago South, (rule stated).
Vacinek v. First National Bank of Pine City 416 N.W.2d 795 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Vacinek v. First National Bank of Pine City 416 N.W.2d 795 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
A special verdict answer “will be set aside only if perverse and palpably contrary to the evidence, or where the evidence is so clear that there is no room for differences among reasonable persons.”
Aries v. Palmer Johnson, Inc. 735 P.2d 1373 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1987
Empire State Bank v. Varpness 395 N.W.2d 387 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Empire State Bank v. Varpness 395 N.W.2d 387 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Even though we are reluctant to set aside a jury’s special verdict, such a disposition is appropriate where, as here, the evidence is “so clear as to leave no room for differences among reasonable persons.”
Jacobsen v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc. 392 N.W.2d 868 Minn. 1986
Jacobsen v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc. 392 N.W.2d 868 Minn. 1986
punitive damages not available under prior contract law, Barr/Nelson, Inc. v. Tonto's, Inc., (punitive damages for breach of contract are not available under either common law or Minn. Stat. § 549.20 ), plus an award of attorney fees normally not heretofore recoverable in this type of action, Barr/Nelson, d at 53 ; (Both cases cite that this court has “long held that attorney fees are not recoverable in litigation unless there is a specific contract permitting or a statute authorizing such recov
Hughes v. Sinclair Marketing, Inc. 389 N.W.2d 194 Minn. 1986
Hughes v. Sinclair Marketing, Inc. 389 N.W.2d 194 Minn. 1986
Germann v. F.L. Smithe MacHine Co. 381 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Germann v. F.L. Smithe MacHine Co. 381 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Generally, an answer to a special verdict form may be set aside only where it is perverse and palpably contrary to the evidence, or where the evidence is so clear as to leave no room for a difference of opinion among reasonable persons
Metag v. K-Mart Corp. 385 N.W.2d 864 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Metag v. K-Mart Corp. 385 N.W.2d 864 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Hughes v. Sinclair Marketing, Inc. 375 N.W.2d 875 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Hughes v. Sinclair Marketing, Inc. 375 N.W.2d 875 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Yost v. Millhouse 373 N.W.2d 826 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Yost v. Millhouse 373 N.W.2d 826 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Tibbals v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 370 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Tibbals v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 370 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Anderson v. Medtronic, Inc. 365 N.W.2d 364 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Anderson v. Medtronic, Inc. 365 N.W.2d 364 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Sievert v. LaMarca 367 N.W.2d 580 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Sievert v. LaMarca 367 N.W.2d 580 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
High Forest Truck Stop, Inc. v. LaCrosse Petroleum Equipment Co. 364 N.W.2d 810 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
High Forest Truck Stop, Inc. v. LaCrosse Petroleum Equipment Co. 364 N.W.2d 810 Minn. Ct. App. 1985

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by