Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Lamb v. Jordan, 333 N.W.2d 852.

132 citing documents.

Alderman's Inc. v. Shanks 515 N.W.2d 97 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Alderman's Inc. v. Shanks 515 N.W.2d 97 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
(JNOV may be granted when the evidence is “so overwhelming as to preclude reasonable minds from differing” as to the proper outcome).
B & H Investment Co. v. Union Stockyards Co. of Fargo 513 N.W.2d 264 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
B & H Investment Co. v. Union Stockyards Co. of Fargo 513 N.W.2d 264 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
ANALYSIS Standard of Review Judgment notwithstanding the verdict “may be granted only when evidence is so over-whelmingly on one side that reasonable minds cannot differ as to the proper outcome.” (citations omitted).
Minnesota Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Anderson 504 N.W.2d 284 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Minnesota Mutual Life Insurance Co. v. Anderson 504 N.W.2d 284 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
(JNOV may be granted only when the evidence on one side is so overwhelming that reasonable minds cannot differ as to the proper outcome).
Krutsch v. Walter H. Collin GmBh Verfahrenstechnik Und Maschinenfabric 495 N.W.2d 208 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Krutsch v. Walter H. Collin GmBh Verfahrenstechnik Und Maschinenfabric 495 N.W.2d 208 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
(quoting 4 Douglas D. McFarland & William J. Keppel, Minnesota Civil Practice § 2402 (1979 & Supp.1982)) (other citations omitted), quoted in McKay’s Family Dodge, d at 145 .
Strauss v. Thorne 490 N.W.2d 908 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Strauss v. Thorne 490 N.W.2d 908 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
See Murphy v. Country House, Inc., 307 Minn. 344 , 351—52, (genuine issue must be established by “substantial evidence” or evidence sufficient to avoid a directed verdict at trial); (JNOV granted if “reasonable minds cannot differ” as to the outcome).
Brooks v. Doherty, Rumble & Butler 481 N.W.2d 120 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Brooks v. Doherty, Rumble & Butler 481 N.W.2d 120 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Judgment notwithstanding the verdict “may be granted only when the evidence is so overwhelming on one side that reasonable minds cannot differ as to the proper outcome.” (quoting 4 D. McFarland & W. Keppel, Minnesota Civil Practice § 2402 (1979 and Supp.1982)).
Reider v. City of Spring Lake Park 480 N.W.2d 662 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Reider v. City of Spring Lake Park 480 N.W.2d 662 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
“A new trial should not be granted unless the verdict is so contrary to the preponderance of the evidence as to imply that the jury failed to consider all of the evidence or acted under some mistake or from some improper motive, bias, feeling or caprice, instead of honestly and dispassionately exercising its judgment.” -56 (Minn.1983) (quoting LaValle v. Aqualand Pool Co., Inc., ).
McKay's Family Dodge v. Hardrives, Inc. 480 N.W.2d 141 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
McKay's Family Dodge v. Hardrives, Inc. 480 N.W.2d 141 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
(quoting 4 D. McFarland & W. Keppel, Minnesota Civil Practice § 2402 (1979 and Supp.1982)) (other citations omitted).
Hahn v. Tri-Line Farmers Co-Op 478 N.W.2d 515 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Hahn v. Tri-Line Farmers Co-Op 478 N.W.2d 515 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Wilson v. Weight Watchers of Upper Midwest, Inc. 474 N.W.2d 380 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Wilson v. Weight Watchers of Upper Midwest, Inc. 474 N.W.2d 380 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Even applying the strict standard of review called for on denied motions for JNOV, the trial court should have found appellant had a qualified privilege to discuss with respondent a possible chemical abuse problem.
Hassler v. Simon 466 N.W.2d 434 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Hassler v. Simon 466 N.W.2d 434 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Diesen v. Hessburg 455 N.W.2d 446 Minn. 1990
Diesen v. Hessburg 455 N.W.2d 446 Minn. 1990
A trial court must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury verdict, and should not grant JNOV unless “the evidence is practically conclusive against the verdict and reasonable minds can reach only one conclusion.”
Erickson Ex Rel. Bunker v. American Honda Motor Co. 455 N.W.2d 74 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Erickson Ex Rel. Bunker v. American Honda Motor Co. 455 N.W.2d 74 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Benson v. NORTHERN GOPHER ENTERPRISES 446 N.W.2d 678 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Benson v. NORTHERN GOPHER ENTERPRISES 446 N.W.2d 678 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Alternatively stated, the evidence is sufficient unless the verdict it would produce is "manifestly and palpably contrary to the evidence,” (quoting Vanderweyst v. Langford, 303 Minn. 575, 576 , ); or one reasonable minds could not reach, or is contradicted by evidence "practically conclusive against the verdict.” Bischer at 733 (quoting Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc., 305 Minn. 506, 507 , ).
Born v. Medico Life Insurance Co. 428 N.W.2d 585 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Born v. Medico Life Insurance Co. 428 N.W.2d 585 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Leach v. Estate of Dahl 419 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Leach v. Estate of Dahl 419 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
(evidence must be viewed to support the verdict, and the reviewing court may not weigh evidence or evaluate witnesses).
Carnahan v. Walsh 416 N.W.2d 187 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Carnahan v. Walsh 416 N.W.2d 187 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Markowitz v. Ness 413 N.W.2d 843 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Markowitz v. Ness 413 N.W.2d 843 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Gillespie v. Klun 406 N.W.2d 547 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Gillespie v. Klun 406 N.W.2d 547 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Shipka v. Helvig 405 N.W.2d 248 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Shipka v. Helvig 405 N.W.2d 248 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
-56 (Minn.1983) (quoting LaValle v. Aqualand Pool Co., Inc., ).
Kielkucki v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. 402 N.W.2d 835 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Gross on Behalf of Gross v. Running 403 N.W.2d 243 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Kielkucki v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. 402 N.W.2d 835 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
“Judgment notwithstanding the verdict ‘may be granted only when the evidence is so overwhelming on one side that reasonable minds cannot differ as to the proper outcome.’ ” (citing 4 D. McFarland & W. Keppel, Minnesota Civil Practice § 24.02 (1979) and Supp.1982)).
Gross on Behalf of Gross v. Running 403 N.W.2d 243 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Rands v. Forest Lake Lumber Mart, Inc. 402 N.W.2d 565 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Rands v. Forest Lake Lumber Mart, Inc. 402 N.W.2d 565 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Petersen v. Kidd 400 N.W.2d 413 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Petersen v. Kidd 400 N.W.2d 413 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Siegler v. Conner 396 N.W.2d 612 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Siegler v. Conner 396 N.W.2d 612 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
A judgment notwithstanding the verdict “may be granted only when the evidence is so overwhelming on one side that reasonable minds cannot differ as to the proper outcome.” (quoting 4 D. McFarland & W. Keppel, Minnesota Civil Practice § 2402 (1979 and Supp.1982)).