Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite O'MALLEY v. Ulland Bros., 549 N.W.2d 889.

170 citing documents.

Hughes v. Lund 603 N.W.2d 674 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Hughes v. Lund 603 N.W.2d 674 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Pergament v. Loring Properties, Ltd. 599 N.W.2d 146 Minn. 1999
Fahrendorff Ex Rel. Fahrendorff v. North Homes, Inc. 597 N.W.2d 905 Minn. 1999
Olson v. Lyrek 582 N.W.2d 582 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Olson v. Lyrek 582 N.W.2d 582 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
O’ *584 897 (Minn.1996) (holding resolution of whether common enterprise exists is legal determination, not factual inference.)
Carstens v. Mayers, Inc. 574 N.W.2d 733 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Carstens v. Mayers, Inc. 574 N.W.2d 733 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
The aim of the election of remedies provision is “to prevent a double recovery by an injured person from both the employer and a third party where ‘the masters-have joined forces and in effect have put the servants into a common pool.’” O’ (quoting Gleason v. Geary, 214 Minn. 499, 511 , ).
Minnesota Brewing Co. v. Egan & Sons Co. 574 N.W.2d 54 Minn. 1998
Minnesota Brewing Co. v. Egan & Sons Co. 574 N.W.2d 54 Minn. 1998
at 529 (clarifying that an employer’s subrogation action against a third party is a tort action); O’ (stating, “Under Minn.Stat.
Landview Landscaping, Inc. v. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 569 N.W.2d 237 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Landview Landscaping, Inc. v. Minnehaha Creek Watershed District 569 N.W.2d 237 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Petition of Willmus 568 N.W.2d 722 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Petition of Willmus 568 N.W.2d 722 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
We must also resolve all inferences from those facts in favor of the nonmoving party, O’ (citing Sauter v. Sauter, 244 Minn. 482 /484-85, ).
Sutton v. Hansen 562 N.W.2d 35 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Sutton v. Hansen 562 N.W.2d 35 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
On appeal from summary judgment, this court reviews the record to determine “(1) whether there are any genuine issues of material fact to be determined, and (2) whether the district court erred in its application of the law.” O’
Minnesota Brewing Co. v. Egan & Sons Co. 560 N.W.2d 111 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Minnesota Brewing Co. v. Egan & Sons Co. 560 N.W.2d 111 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
* * * In short, the community of interest gives the third party, who is subject to the compensation act, under this statute the status of an employer toward the [employee], O’-95 (Minn.1996) (quoting Rasmussen v. George Benz & Sons, 168 Minn. 319, 325 , 210 N.W.
Sorenson v. Visser 558 N.W.2d 773 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Sorenson v. Visser 558 N.W.2d 773 Minn. Ct. App. 1997