Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Cairl v. State, 323 N.W.2d 20.

134 citing documents.

H.B. ex rel. Clarke v. Whittemore 533 N.W.2d 887 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
25 n. 7 (Minn.1982); see also Restatement (Second) of Torts § 314 (no duty to take action to aid or protect others).
Steinke v. City of Andover 525 N.W.2d 173 Minn. 1994
Steinke v. City of Andover 525 N.W.2d 173 Minn. 1994
Nusbaum, d at 719 , ( , 23 n. 2 (Minn.1982)).
Waste Recovery Cooperative v. County of Hennepin 517 N.W.2d 329 Minn. 1994
Waste Recovery Cooperative v. County of Hennepin 517 N.W.2d 329 Minn. 1994
We further reiterated our concern, n. 2 (Minn.1982), with “merely attaching labels such as ‘discretionary,’ ‘ministerial,’ ‘planning level’ and ‘operational level’ to certain conduct in a conclusory manner.” Id.
Olson v. Ramsey County 509 N.W.2d 368 Minn. 1993
Olson v. Ramsey County 509 N.W.2d 368 Minn. 1993
(decision to allow a dangerous patient at the Brainerd State Hospital to go home for holiday leave was protected by discretionary function immunity).
Waste Recovery Cooperative of Minnesota v. County of Hennepin 504 N.W.2d 220 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Waste Recovery Cooperative of Minnesota v. County of Hennepin 504 N.W.2d 220 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Olson v. Ramsey County 497 N.W.2d 629 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Olson v. Ramsey County 497 N.W.2d 629 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Koelln v. Nexus Residential Treatment Facility 494 N.W.2d 914 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Koelln v. Nexus Residential Treatment Facility 494 N.W.2d 914 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Carradine v. State 494 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Carradine v. State 494 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Pletan v. Gaines 481 N.W.2d 566 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Pletan v. Gaines 481 N.W.2d 566 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
NW BY JW v. Anderson 478 N.W.2d 542 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
NW BY JW v. Anderson 478 N.W.2d 542 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
25 n. 7 (Minn.1982) (citing Restatement (Second) of Torts § 314, comment c (1965)).
Silberstein v. Cordie 474 N.W.2d 850 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Silberstein v. Cordie 474 N.W.2d 850 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
n. 7 (Minn.1982) (no duty to warn when pyromaniac youth released from state institution on home leave when no threat to a specific victim).
Sayers Ex Rel. Sayers v. Beltrami County 472 N.W.2d 656 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Sayers Ex Rel. Sayers v. Beltrami County 472 N.W.2d 656 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Although “almost every act involves some measure of discretion, * * * not every act of government is entitled to discretionary immunity.”
Abo El Ela v. State 468 N.W.2d 580 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Abo El Ela v. State 468 N.W.2d 580 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Pletan v. Gaines 460 N.W.2d 74 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Pletan v. Gaines 460 N.W.2d 74 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Imlay v. City of Lake Crystal 453 N.W.2d 326 Minn. 1990
Imlay v. City of Lake Crystal 453 N.W.2d 326 Minn. 1990
McElwain v. Van Beek 447 N.W.2d 442 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
McElwain v. Van Beek 447 N.W.2d 442 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Schaeffer v. State 444 N.W.2d 876 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Schaeffer v. State 444 N.W.2d 876 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
the supreme court recognized that almost every governmental act involves some measure of discretion, but that every such act is not entitled to discretionary immunity.
Dahlheimer v. City of Dayton 441 N.W.2d 534 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Dahlheimer v. City of Dayton 441 N.W.2d 534 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Snyder v. City of Minneapolis 422 N.W.2d 747 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Snyder v. City of Minneapolis 422 N.W.2d 747 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Holmquist v. State 425 N.W.2d 230 Minn. 1988
Holmquist v. State 425 N.W.2d 230 Minn. 1988
Johnston v. Michael Shea and Associates 425 N.W.2d 263 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Johnston v. Michael Shea and Associates 425 N.W.2d 263 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
“[C]ourts * * * are not an appropriate forum to review and second-guess the acts of government which involve ‘the exercise of judgment or discretion.’ ” (quoting Sulsa v. State, 311 Minn. 166, 175 , ).
Nusbaum v. County of Blue Earth 422 N.W.2d 713 Minn. 1988
Chabot v. City of Sauk Rapids 422 N.W.2d 708 Minn. 1988
Chabot v. City of Sauk Rapids 422 N.W.2d 708 Minn. 1988
Nusbaum v. County of Blue Earth 422 N.W.2d 713 Minn. 1988
This court has recognized that “almost every act involves some measure of discretion, and yet undoubtedly not every act of government is entitled to discretionary immunity.”
Chabot v. City of Sauk Rapids 412 N.W.2d 371 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Chabot v. City of Sauk Rapids 412 N.W.2d 371 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
WOOD ON BEHALF OF DOE v. Astleford 412 N.W.2d 753 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
WOOD ON BEHALF OF DOE v. Astleford 412 N.W.2d 753 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
See, e.g., Lundgren, d at 27 ; , 25 n. 7 (Minn.1982).
Holmquist v. State 409 N.W.2d 243 Minn. Ct. App. 1987