DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Tereault v. Palmer, 413 N.W.2d 283.

220 citing documents.

  • In Re the Welfare of S.J.D. 617 N.W.2d 614 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
  • In Re the Welfare of S.J.D. 617 N.W.2d 614 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
    review denied (Minn. Dec.
  • State v. Anderson 603 N.W.2d 354 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
  • State v. Anderson 603 N.W.2d 354 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
    “[T]he task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.” review denied (Minn. Dec.
  • Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. v. Eull 594 N.W.2d 559 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
  • Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. v. Eull 594 N.W.2d 559 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
    (“[T]he task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.”), review denied (Minn. Dec.
  • Whalen Ex Rel. Whalen v. Whalen 594 N.W.2d 277 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
  • Whalen Ex Rel. Whalen v. Whalen 594 N.W.2d 277 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
    See Martinco v. Hastings, 265 Minn. 490, 495, 497 , 638 (1963) (stating “[i]f there is to be a change in the statute, it must come from the legislature, for the courts cannot supply that which the legislature purposefully omits or inadvertently overlooks”); (stating “the task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but does not fall to this court”), review denied (Minn. Dec.
  • Tester v. American Standard, Inc. 590 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
  • Tester v. American Standard, Inc. 590 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
    And while we note the trial court’s expertise in matters related to asbestos litigation and the persuasiveness of its arguments for allowing aggregation of fault in asbestos cases, this court cannot extend the doctrine of aggregation because “the task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.” (Minn.App.
  • Drilling v. Berman 589 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
  • Drilling v. Berman 589 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
    review denied (Minn. Dec.
  • Brula v. St. Louis County 587 N.W.2d 859 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
  • Brula v. St. Louis County 587 N.W.2d 859 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
    Moreover, even if we were persuaded by relator’s arguments that federal case-law and public policy support extending the application of VPA benefits, “the task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court.” review denied (Minn. Dec.
  • Singh v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 523 N.W.2d 348 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
  • Singh v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 523 N.W.2d 348 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
    See Wallace v. Commissioner of Taxation, 289 Minn. 220, 230 , (“courts cannot supply that which the legislature purposely omits or inadvertently overlooks”); (“the task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court”), pet.
  • Franzen v. Borders 521 N.W.2d 626 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
  • Franzen v. Borders 521 N.W.2d 626 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
    (extending existing law is for supreme court or legislature, not court of appeals), pet.
  • Case v. Case 516 N.W.2d 570 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
  • Case v. Case 516 N.W.2d 570 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
    (“the task of extending existing law falls to the supreme court or the legislature, but it does not fall to this court”), pet.