Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Cox v. Crown CoCo, Inc., 544 N.W.2d 490.

20 citing documents.

Dwight Higgins, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Auth., d at 479; see also Cox v. Crown CoCo, Inc., (“Generally, a contemporaneous objection to improper remarks and a request 9 for curative instructions are prerequisites to receiving a new trial on appeal.”).
Ty Bernard, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
No. 709, (citing DeWitt, d at 795); Cox v. Crown CoCo, Inc.
Debra Sakrison, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
C ox v. Crown CoCo, Inc. , (citations omitted).
Charity Slaughter, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
See Cox v. Crown CoCo, Inc., d 490, 496 (Minn. App. 1996) (applying McDonnell Douglas standard to MOSHA retaliation claim in analyzing whether district court e rred by denying motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict); see also Graham v. Special Sch.
Waymouth Farms, Inc., Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Crown CoCo, Inc. , (quoting Hudson v. Snyder Body, Inc., ).
Greg Peterson, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Kaytee Hooser v. Keith Anderson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Kaytee Hooser v. Keith Anderson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In re the Matter of: C. O. v. John and Jackie Doe Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In re the Matter of: C. O. v. John and Jackie Doe Minn. Ct. App. 2014
and added to the judgment or award.” See also Cox v. Crown CoCo, Inc., (finding that the court’s calculation of interest from the date the court issued an order entitling the party to attorney fees was appropriate as this was the date of entitlement).
Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company v. Historic Ivy Tower, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Company v. Historic Ivy Tower, LLC Minn. Ct. App. 2014
13, 2001); Cox v. Crown CoCo, Inc., 18 –01 (Minn. App. 1996) (same).
Duxbury v. Spex Feeds, Inc. 681 N.W.2d 380 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Duxbury v. Spex Feeds, Inc. 681 N.W.2d 380 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
15, 2001); Cox v. Crown CoCo, Inc., -01 (Minn.App.1996).
Kuechle v. Life's Companion P.C.A., Inc. 653 N.W.2d 214 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Kuechle v. Life's Companion P.C.A., Inc. 653 N.W.2d 214 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Cox v. Crown CoCo, Inc., (concluding there were no reasonable or probable grounds for the defamatory statements because the employer did not investigate her suspicions or confront the employee with her accusations before she made the defamatory statements).
Abraham v. County of Hennepin 639 N.W.2d 342 Minn. 2002
Abraham v. County of Hennepin 639 N.W.2d 342 Minn. 2002
See, -79 (Minn.1990) (holding that both statutory-cause of action for sexual harassment and common law cause of action for battery can be maintained even though both claims arise from same set of operative facts); Cox v. Crown CoCo, Inc., -97 (Minn.App.1996) (allowing claim for retaliatory discharge under both the Whis-tleblower Act and MOSHA); (rejecting argument that attorney fee provisions of Minn.Stat.
Benson v. Northwest Airlines, Inc. 561 N.W.2d 530 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Benson v. Northwest Airlines, Inc. 561 N.W.2d 530 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
See Cox v. Crown CoCo, Inc., (district *538 court.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by