Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite Daly v. McFarland, 812 N.W.2d 113.
-
Josh Campion, et al., Appellants,
Minn. Ct. App. 2026
at 205; -12 2 (Minn. 2012) (declining to extend the doctrine to recreational snowmobiling).
-
Susan Neegard, Appellant,
Minn. Ct. App. 2026
The association argues that Neegard failed to offer evidence that the association “did something that a reasonable golf course operator would not do.” First, as to breach of duty, primary assumption of the risk “completely bars a plaintiff’s claim because it negates the defendant’s duty of care to the plaintiff.”
-
Richard Nichols, Appellant,
Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“JMOL is inappropriate if jurors could differ on the conclusions to be drawn from the record.” (quotation omitted).
- A23-0484 Andrea Anderson v. Aitkin Pharmacy Services, LLC dba Thrifty White Pharmacy, George ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
-
A23-0484 Andrea Anderson v. Aitkin Pharmacy Services, LLC dba Thrifty White Pharmacy, George ...
Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“A party is entitled to a specific jury instruction if evidence exists at trial to support the instruction.” (quotation omitted).
- Minn. 2022
- Minn. 2021
- Peg Otte, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
- Zulfe Enterprises, Inc., et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
- Daniel J. Cafferty, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
- Laurie Jatho, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
- Patrick Simondet, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
-
Melissa Regouski, as court-appointed Guardian and Conservator for Morgan Moeller, Ward and Protected Person, Appellant,
Minn. Ct. App. 2019
d 113, 119 (Minn. 2012).
-
Greg Peterson, Appellant,
Minn. Ct. App. 2019
A district court has broad discretion to determine jury instructions, and this court “will not reverse where jury instructions overall fairly and correctly state the applicable law.” Daly v. McFarland, 6 (quotations omitted).
-
Renee Dianne Florek, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(“A special verdict form is to be liberally construed to give effect to the intention of the jury and on appellate review it is the court’s responsibility to harmonize all findings if at all possible.” (quotation omitted)).
- Henson v. Uptown Drink, LLC 922 N.W.2d 185 Minn. 2019
- Soderberg v. Anderson 922 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 2019
-
Soderberg v. Anderson
922 N.W.2d 200
Minn. 2019
Daly v. McFarland , , 120-21 (Minn. 2012) ; Springrose , d at 827 (explaining that primary assumption of risk "is not ...
-
Henson v. Uptown Drink, LLC
922 N.W.2d 185
Minn. 2019
Daly v. McFarland , , 119 (Minn. 2012).
- Alby v. BNSF Ry. Co. 918 N.W.2d 562 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
-
Alby v. BNSF Ry. Co.
918 N.W.2d 562
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Daly v. McFarland , , 119 (Minn. 2012).
- Christie v. Estate 911 N.W.2d 833 Minn. 2018
-
Christie v. Estate
911 N.W.2d 833
Minn. 2018
Daly v. McFarland , , 122 (Minn. 2012) (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).
-
Mark Kedrowski, Appellant,
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“Viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the nonmoving party, this court makes an independent determination of whether there is sufficient evidence to present an issue of fact for the jury.” Jerry’s Enters., Inc., d at 816; d 113, 119 (Minn. 2012) (“A motion for judgment as a matter of law is reviewed de novo.”).
-
Ricky Johnson, d/b/a Rick Johnson’s Deer and Beaver, Inc., Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2017
On appeal, we review a district court’s jury instructions for abuse of discreti on, and will afford relief on appeal “if the jury instruction was erroneous and such error was prejudicial to respondent, or if the instruction was erroneous and its effect cannot be determined.” (quotations omitted).
- Anthony Patrick Huber, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
- Jacquelyn Bliss, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
- Charlotte Nelson, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
- 650 North Main Association v. Frauenshuh, Inc. (Territorial Springs Riverview, LLC, Frauenshuh Sweeney, LLC), Kraus-Anderson Construction Company, Doe … 885 N.W.2d 478 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
-
650 North Main Association v. Frauenshuh, Inc. (Territorial Springs Riverview, LLC, Frauenshuh Sweeney, LLC), Kraus-Anderson Construction Company, Doe …
885 N.W.2d 478
Minn. Ct. App. 2016
A district court presented with inconsistent special verdict form answers may change the answers, “in effect partially directing a verdict, where it is deemed that a jury’s response must be changed as a matter of law.” (quotation omitted).
- James M. Johnson v. Princeton Public Utilities Commission, and third party v. Hydrocon, Inc., Third Party Minn. Ct. App. 2016
- James M. Johnson v. Princeton Public Utilities Commission, and third party v. Hydrocon, Inc., Third Party Minn. Ct. App. 2016
- Swanny of Hugo, Inc., d/b/a Carpenter's Steak House v. Integrity Mutual Insurance Company Minn. Ct. App. 2015
- Swanny of Hugo, Inc., d/b/a Carpenter's Steak House v. Integrity Mutual Insurance Company Minn. Ct. App. 2015
- RKL Landholdings, LLC v. Seneca Specialty Insurance Company, 1563 University Ave, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
- RKL Landholdings, LLC v. Seneca Specialty Insurance Company, 1563 University Ave, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2015
- Jason Donald Matakis v. State of Minnesota 862 N.W.2d 33 Minn. 2015
-
Jason Donald Matakis v. State of Minnesota
862 N.W.2d 33
Minn. 2015
We "typically do not review issues not raised in the petition.” , 126 n. 6 (Minn.2012).
- Eischen v. Crystal Valley Cooperative 835 N.W.2d 629 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
-
Eischen v. Crystal Valley Cooperative
835 N.W.2d 629
Minn. Ct. App. 2013
“Primary assumption of the risk completely negates a defendant’s negligence” by “negating] the defendant’s duty of care to the plaintiff.” Daly v. McFar *633 land, (quotation omitted).
- Grady v. Green Acres, Inc. 826 N.W.2d 547 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
-
Grady v. Green Acres, Inc.
826 N.W.2d 547
Minn. Ct. App. 2013
(holding that collision between participants is not an inherent risk of snowmobiling because a snowmobile, "carefully operated, is no more hazardous than an automobile, train, or taxi”).
- Gieseke ex rel. Diversified Water Diversion, Inc. v. IDCA, Inc. 826 N.W.2d 816 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
-
Gieseke ex rel. Diversified Water Diversion, Inc. v. IDCA, Inc.
826 N.W.2d 816
Minn. Ct. App. 2013
JMOL is “inappropriate if jurors could differ on the conclusions to be drawn from the record.” (quotation omitted).
- State v. Hokanson 821 N.W.2d 340 Minn. 2012
-
State v. Hokanson
821 N.W.2d 340
Minn. 2012
And we are “ ‘extremely reluctant to overrule our precedent under principles of stare decisis’ [and] require a ‘compelling reason’ before a prior decision will be overruled.” ().
- Renswick v. Wenzel 819 N.W.2d 198 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
- Renswick v. Wenzel 819 N.W.2d 198 Minn. Ct. App. 2012