Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Schroeder v. St. Louis County, 708 N.W.2d 497.

157 citing documents.

Doug Blaine v. City of Sartell, County of Stearns 865 N.W.2d 723 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Gholamreza Kian, Trustee for the Next of Kin of Sean Kian, Decedent v. City of Minnetonka Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Doug Blaine v. City of Sartell, County of Stearns 865 N.W.2d 723 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Gholamreza Kian, Trustee for the Next of Kin of Sean Kian, Decedent v. City of Minnetonka Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Nicole Curtis v. Jason Jenny Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Nicole Curtis v. Jason Jenny Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Temitope Raufu Ibraheem v. Epic Entertainment, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Temitope Raufu Ibraheem v. Epic Entertainment, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Louis Cnty., (describing substantial evidence as the “incorrect legal standard” and clarifying that “summary judgment is inappropriate if the nonmoving party has the burden of proof on an issue and presents sufficient evidence to permit reasonable persons to draw different conclusions”).
Rotary Systems, Inc. v. TomoTherapy Incorporated, Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Rotary Systems, Inc. v. TomoTherapy Incorporated, Dynamic Sealing Technologies, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Michelle Kirchner v. Patricia Jernell, Turpen Realty Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Michelle Kirchner v. Patricia Jernell, Turpen Realty Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Louis Cnty., (quotation omitted).
Juan Edward Shariss v. City of Bloomington 852 N.W.2d 278 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Juan Edward Shariss v. City of Bloomington 852 N.W.2d 278 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Louis Cnty., (quotation omitted).
Limberg v. Mitchell 834 N.W.2d 211 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Limberg v. Mitchell 834 N.W.2d 211 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Citizens State Bank Norwood Young America v. Brown 829 N.W.2d 634 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Citizens State Bank Norwood Young America v. Brown 829 N.W.2d 634 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Louis Cnty., (stating that party with burden of proof who opposes summary judgment must present “sufficient evidence to permit reasonable persons to draw different conclusions” (emphasis omitted)).
Fernow v. Gould 816 N.W.2d 647 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Fernow v. Gould 816 N.W.2d 647 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Horodenski v. Lyndale Green Townhome Ass'n 804 N.W.2d 366 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Horodenski v. Lyndale Green Townhome Ass'n 804 N.W.2d 366 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Louis Cnty., (emphasis omitted).
Johnson v. Paynesville Farmers Union Cooperative Oil Co. 802 N.W.2d 383 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Johnson v. Paynesville Farmers Union Cooperative Oil Co. 802 N.W.2d 383 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Sayer v. Minnesota Department of Transportation 790 N.W.2d 151 Minn. 2010
Upper Minnetonka Yacht Club v. City of Shorewood 770 N.W.2d 184 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Upper Minnetonka Yacht Club v. City of Shorewood 770 N.W.2d 184 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Louis County, (stating that “[a] party need not show substantial evidence to withstand summary judgment.
Southcross Commerce Center, LLP v. Tupy Properties, LLC 766 N.W.2d 704 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Southcross Commerce Center, LLP v. Tupy Properties, LLC 766 N.W.2d 704 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Louis County, (“A party need not show substantial evidence to withstand summary judgment.
JW Ex Rel. BRW v. 287 INTER. DIST. 761 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
J.W. ex rel. B.R.W. v. 287 Intermediate District 761 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
JW Ex Rel. BRW v. 287 INTER. DIST. 761 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Louis County, ("[M]unicipalities are generally liable for the torts of their employees if the tort is committed within the scope of employment.").
J.W. ex rel. B.R.W. v. 287 Intermediate District 761 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Louis County, (“Municipalities are generally liable for the torts of their employees if the tort is committed within the scope of employment.”).
Donnelly Bros. Construction Co. v. State Auto Property & Casualty Insurance Co. 759 N.W.2d 651 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Donnelly Bros. Construction Co. v. State Auto Property & Casualty Insurance Co. 759 N.W.2d 651 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Northeast Concrete Products, LLC 756 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Liberty Mutual Insurance Co. v. Northeast Concrete Products, LLC 756 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Louis County, (stating that “[a] party need not show substantial evidence to withstand summary judgment.
McGlothlin v. Steinmetz 751 N.W.2d 75 Minn. 2008
McGlothlin v. Steinmetz 751 N.W.2d 75 Minn. 2008
Louis County, (“[SJummary judgment is inappropriate if the nonmoving party has the burden of proof on an issue and presents sufficient evidence to permit reasonable persons to draw different conclusions.”); Lee, d at 382 (noting that “‘probable cause to search [exists] where the known facts and circumstanc
Frieler v. Carlson Marketing Group, Inc. 751 N.W.2d 558 Minn. 2008
Frieler v. Carlson Marketing Group, Inc. 751 N.W.2d 558 Minn. 2008
Gomez v. David A. Williams Realty & Construction, Inc. 740 N.W.2d 775 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Gomez v. David A. Williams Realty & Construction, Inc. 740 N.W.2d 775 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Christians v. Grant Thornton, LLP 733 N.W.2d 803 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Christians v. Grant Thornton, LLP 733 N.W.2d 803 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Carlson v. Sala Architects, Inc. 732 N.W.2d 324 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Carlson v. Sala Architects, Inc. 732 N.W.2d 324 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Louis County, (emphasis omitted).
Osborne v. Twin Town Bowl, Inc. 730 N.W.2d 307 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Osborne v. Twin Town Bowl, Inc. 730 N.W.2d 307 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Louis County, (clarifying that “summary judgment is inappropriate if the nonmov-ing party has the burden of proof on an issue and presents sufficient evidence to permit reasonable persons to draw different conclusions” (emphasis in original)); Nicollet Restoration v. St.
Bjerke v. Johnson 727 N.W.2d 183 Minn. Ct. App. 2007