Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Maday v. Yellow Taxi Co. of Minneapolis, 311 N.W.2d 849.

27 citing documents.

American Family Insurance, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Maday v. Yellow Taxi Co. of Minneapolis , Pagel, d at 756; see also Flanery, 332 7 appellate brief that its payments to A.B.
Alice Ann Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud 853 N.W.2d 713 Minn. 2014
Alice Ann Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud 853 N.W.2d 713 Minn. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Toby Earl Johnson 851 N.W.2d 60 Minn. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Toby Earl Johnson 851 N.W.2d 60 Minn. 2014
(“It has always been the law of this state that parties whose negligence concurs to cause injury are jointly and severally liable although not acting in concert.”); Flaherty v. Minneapolis & St.
Blohm v. Johnson 523 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Blohm v. Johnson 523 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
“In general, parties whose negligence concurs to cause an injury are jointly and severally liable for the plaintiffs total award.” (), pet.
Fiedler v. Spoelhof 483 N.W.2d 486 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Fiedler v. Spoelhof 483 N.W.2d 486 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Preferred Risk Mutual Insurance Co. v. Pagel 439 N.W.2d 755 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Preferred Risk Mutual Insurance Co. v. Pagel 439 N.W.2d 755 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Johnson v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. 413 N.W.2d 172 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Johnson v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. 413 N.W.2d 172 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Ketterling v. Spud Bar, Inc. 398 N.W.2d 599 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Ketterling v. Spud Bar, Inc. 398 N.W.2d 599 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
The supreme court has consistently held that comparative fault does not prevent holding “each defendant liable for a plaintiffs total recoverable damages even when a jury finds that defendant only partially at fault.” (footnote omitted).
Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. v. Wright 391 N.W.2d 519 Minn. 1986
Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. v. Wright 391 N.W.2d 519 Minn. 1986
(joint and several liability applies to an uninsured motorist subrogation action.)
Yule v. Iowa National Mutual Insurance Co. 390 N.W.2d 391 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Yule v. Iowa National Mutual Insurance Co. 390 N.W.2d 391 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
(“Where the facts reasonably tend to show negligence on the part of both defendants, submission of a comparative negligence question is proper.”) DECISION The trial court erred by instructing the jury that appellants’ burden was to prove their claim by clear and convincing evidence.
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Galloway 373 N.W.2d 301 Minn. 1985
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Galloway 373 N.W.2d 301 Minn. 1985
Flanery v. Total Tree, Inc.
Erickson v. Hinckley Municipal Liquor Store 373 N.W.2d 318 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Erickson v. Hinckley Municipal Liquor Store 373 N.W.2d 318 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Hosley v. Armstrong Cork Co. 364 N.W.2d 813 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Hosley v. Armstrong Cork Co. 364 N.W.2d 813 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Galloway 354 N.W.2d 527 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Galloway 354 N.W.2d 527 Minn. Ct. App. 1984