Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite McDaniel v. United Hardware Distributing Co., 469 N.W.2d 84.

28 citing documents.

Mark Lehnertz, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Co., -86 (Minn. 1991) (emphasis added); see also White Bear Lake Restoration Ass’n ex rel.
Allison Schaber, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Co., (concluding that retaliatory -discharge claim under Worker’s Compensation Act did not require interpretation of collective bargaining agreement and thus was not preem pted by federal law requiring exhaustion of contractual remedies); Moe v. REO Plastics, Inc., No. 14 C7-97-814, 1997 WL 613656, at
Daniel v. City of Minneapolis 923 N.W.2d 637 Minn. 2019
Michael Bliss, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Co., (where de termination of the retaliatory discharge claim “does not require interpretation of a collective bargaining agreement, .
Scott Andren v. James Woodhull Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Scott Andren v. James Woodhull Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Patrick Finn and Lighthouse Management Group, Inc., Appellants/Cross-Respondents v. Alliance Bank, Respondent/Cross-Appellant, Home Federal Bank, Respondent/Cross-Appellant, KleinBank, Respondent/Cross-Appellant, … 860 N.W.2d 638 Minn. 2015
Patrick Finn and Lighthouse Management Group, Inc., Appellants/Cross-Respondents v. Alliance Bank, Respondent/Cross-Appellant, Home Federal Bank, Respondent/Cross-Appellant, KleinBank, Respondent/Cross-Appellant, … 860 N.W.2d 638 Minn. 2015
With respect to the Receiver’s appeal, to hold that the applicable statute of limitations under MUFTA depends on whether a claim is based on actual or constructive fraud.
Yvette Ford v. Minneapolis Public Schools 857 N.W.2d 725 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Yvette Ford v. Minneapolis Public Schools 857 N.W.2d 725 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Co., it had “considered whether an intentional tort created by statute--a claim for retaliatory discharge for an employee’s assertion of workers’ compensation rights pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 176.82 (2012)--was subject to the two-year limitations period of section 541.07 or the six-year period of section 5
Darrel Schmitz v. United States Steel Corporation 852 N.W.2d 669 Minn. 2014
Darrel Schmitz v. United States Steel Corporation 852 N.W.2d 669 Minn. 2014
Co., -86 (Minn.1991) (“Section 176.82 is not a codification of the common law....
Finn v. Alliance Bank 838 N.W.2d 585 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Finn v. Alliance Bank 838 N.W.2d 585 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
ut one that does not begin to run “until the discovery by the aggrieved party of the facts constituting the fraud.” The district court relied on McDaniel v. United Hardware Distributing Co., in which the Minnesota Supreme Court stated that section 541.05, subdivision 1(2), “applies to liabilities imposed by statute, not to liabilities existing at common law which have been recognized by statute.”
Sipe v. STS Manufacturing, Inc. 834 N.W.2d 683 Minn. 2013
Sipe v. STS Manufacturing, Inc. 834 N.W.2d 683 Minn. 2013
Moreover, is consistent with our interpretation of the phrase “other tort resulting in personal injury” as being limited to common law intentional torts.
Schmitz v. United States Steel Corp. 831 N.W.2d 656 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Schmitz v. United States Steel Corp. 831 N.W.2d 656 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Sipe v. STS Manufacturing, Inc. 822 N.W.2d 2 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Sipe v. STS Manufacturing, Inc. 822 N.W.2d 2 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Co., (concluding that six-year statute of limitations applies to statute because statute “grants specific rights and remedies, not previously recognized”).
Holiday Recreational Industries, Inc. v. Manheim Services Corp. 599 N.W.2d 179 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Holiday Recreational Industries, Inc. v. Manheim Services Corp. 599 N.W.2d 179 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Co., (punitive damages); Tran v. Richfield Bank & Trust Co., (treble damages).
Manteuffel v. City of North St. Paul 570 N.W.2d 807 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Manteuffel v. City of North St. Paul 570 N.W.2d 807 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Co., the Minnesota Supreme Court held that Minn.Stat.
Snesrud v. Instant Web, Inc. 484 N.W.2d 423 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Snesrud v. Instant Web, Inc. 484 N.W.2d 423 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Taubman v. Prospect Drilling & Sawing, Inc. 472 N.W.2d 141 Minn. 1991
Taubman v. Prospect Drilling & Sawing, Inc. 472 N.W.2d 141 Minn. 1991