Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Johnson v. County of Nicollet, 387 N.W.2d 209.

30 citing documents.

Robert C. Tengdin, Trustee of the Robert C. Tengdin Revocable Trust dated May 18, 2009, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
(“In actions alleging that a governmental body failed to safely maintain roads and sidewalks, case law consistently holds that the discretionary exception does not 16 The existence of genuine issues of material fact preclude s the application of statutory discretionary function immunity as
Alice Peterson, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Paul, 18 Minn. 279 (1872)); review denied (Minn. June 25, 1987)
Minder v. Anoka County 677 N.W.2d 479 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Minder v. Anoka County 677 N.W.2d 479 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Olmanson v. Le Sueur County 673 N.W.2d 506 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Olmanson v. Le Sueur County 673 N.W.2d 506 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Christensen v. Mower County 587 N.W.2d 305 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Christensen v. Mower County 587 N.W.2d 305 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Fisher v. County of Rock 580 N.W.2d 510 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Fisher v. County of Rock 580 N.W.2d 510 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
To argue that a county’s duty to maintain safe roadways includes a duty to place guardrails along some roads, (holding a county liable for failing to add guardrails to a dangerous segment of road).
Angell v. Hennepin County 565 N.W.2d 475 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Angell v. Hennepin County 565 N.W.2d 475 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
ofessional judgment”); Schaeffer, d at 880-81 (holding that genuine issues of material fact on whether guardrail placement decisions were operational or planning in nature precluded summary judgment based on statutory immunity); Abbett, d at 85 (holding that decision on where to install guardrail involved “professional judgment,” not policymaking); (holding that county’s decision not to place guardrail on a dangerous road was operational because it implemented the county’s policy decision to per
Ai Viet Thi Nguyen v. Phu Chau Nguyen 565 N.W.2d 721 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Distinguished Ai Viet Thi Nguyen v. Phu Chau Nguyen 565 N.W.2d 721 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
(recognizing both an actionable duty and the existence of an operational decision).
Steinke v. City of Andover 525 N.W.2d 173 Minn. 1994
Steinke v. City of Andover 525 N.W.2d 173 Minn. 1994
(holding that city's failure to maintain beach and warn of dangerous conditions was operational function of decision to open beach); (Minn.App.
In Re the Appointment of a Trustee for the Heirs of Jones 419 N.W.2d 839 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
In Re the Appointment of a Trustee for the Heirs of Jones 419 N.W.2d 839 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
See generally Robinson, d at 302
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
we stated: [T]he legal duties owed by municipalities as owners and operators of buildings, roadways, or other facilities * * * are analogous to those owed by private persons, and a breach of such duties can be the basis of a lawsuit against the municipality just as it can be the basis of a lawsuit
Berg v. City of St. Paul 414 N.W.2d 204 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Berg v. City of St. Paul 414 N.W.2d 204 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Holmquist v. State 409 N.W.2d 243 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Holmquist v. State 409 N.W.2d 243 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Seaton v. County of Scott 404 N.W.2d 396 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Seaton v. County of Scott 404 N.W.2d 396 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Nelson v. House 402 N.W.2d 639 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Nelson v. House 402 N.W.2d 639 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
When “public funds [are] spent to procure the insurance policy, [the injured party] should be given the benefit of the policy.” (Foley, J. concurring specially).
Johnson v. Urie 394 N.W.2d 846 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Johnson v. Urie 394 N.W.2d 846 Minn. Ct. App. 1986