Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., 426 N.W.2d 826.

91 citing documents.

Lee Michael Scheurer, Appellant/Cross-Respondent v. Douglas Shrewsbury as Special Administrator for the Estate of Ann ... Minn. 2025
Lee Michael Scheurer, Appellant/Cross-Respondent v. Douglas Shrewsbury as Special Administrator for the Estate of Ann ... Minn. 2025
Scheurer argues that a different rule applies when either party serves a written offer of settlement, citing another provision in the same statute that we have described as the “offer-counteroffer provision.” Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
Great N. Ins. Co. v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc. 911 N.W.2d 510 Minn. 2018
Great N. Ins. Co. v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc. 911 N.W.2d 510 Minn. 2018
Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co. , , 833 (Minn. 1988).
Great Northern Insurance Co. v. Honeywell International, Inc. 895 N.W.2d 255 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Great Northern Insurance Co. v. Honeywell International, Inc. 895 N.W.2d 255 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Minnesota has recognized that a continuing duty to warn of dangers associated with using a product arises only in “special cases.” Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
Arthur Allen Hogenson v. Michael W. Hogenson 852 N.W.2d 266 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Arthur Allen Hogenson v. Michael W. Hogenson 852 N.W.2d 266 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“Valid offers and counteroffers under section 549.09 must be in writing and must offer, in sufficiently clear and definite terms, to dispose completely the claims between the negotiating parties.” Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., d 826, 840 (Minn. 1988).
A & L POTATO CO. v. Aggregate Industries 759 N.W.2d 57 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
A & L POTATO CO. v. Aggregate Industries 759 N.W.2d 57 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
“Valid offers and counteroffers under section 549.09 must be in writing and must offer, in sufficiently clear and definite terms, to dispose completely the claims between the negotiating parties.” Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., (holding that neither the offer nor the counteroffer was valid).
Weston v. McWilliams & Associates, Inc. 716 N.W.2d 634 Minn. 2006
Weston v. McWilliams & Associates, Inc. 716 N.W.2d 634 Minn. 2006
See Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., , 830 n. 3 (Minn.1988) (discussing the operation of a statute of repose to bar recovery even before the cause of action accrues).
Zurich American Insurance Co. v. Bjelland 710 N.W.2d 64 Minn. 2006
Zurich American Insurance Co. v. Bjelland 710 N.W.2d 64 Minn. 2006
Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., -38 (Minn.1988).
Schroeder v. St. Louis County 708 N.W.2d 497 Minn. 2006
Camacho v. Todd and Leiser Homes 706 N.W.2d 49 Minn. 2005
Camacho v. Todd and Leiser Homes 706 N.W.2d 49 Minn. 2005
See, Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., , 830 n. 3 (Minn. 1988); Bulau v. Hector Plumbing & Heating Co.
State Farm Fire & Casualty v. Aquila Inc. 697 N.W.2d 636 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State Farm Fire & Casualty v. Aquila Inc. 697 N.W.2d 636 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
A typical statute of repose will specify a presumptive number of years after which, an action cannot be brought.” Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
Weston v. McWilliams & Associates, Inc. 694 N.W.2d 558 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Weston v. McWilliams & Associates, Inc. 694 N.W.2d 558 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
"A typical statute of repose will specify a presumptive number of years after which an action cannot be brought.” Olmanson, d at 880 (reviewing claims subject to relevant statute of repose; quoting Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., (reviewing "useful life” defense in products liability statute, Minn.Stat.
Olmanson v. LeSueur County 693 N.W.2d 876 Minn. 2005
Olmanson v. LeSueur County 693 N.W.2d 876 Minn. 2005
A typical statute of repose will specify a presumptive number of years after which an action cannot be brought.” Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
Snyder v. Yellow Freight System 683 N.W.2d 788 Minn. 2004
Snyder v. Yellow Freight System 683 N.W.2d 788 Minn. 2004
Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., (citing Minn.Stat.
Gray v. Badger Mining Corp. 676 N.W.2d 268 Minn. 2004
Gray v. Badger Mining Corp. 676 N.W.2d 268 Minn. 2004
See Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., Westerberg v. Sch.
Taney v. Independent School District No. 624 673 N.W.2d 497 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Taney v. Independent School District No. 624 673 N.W.2d 497 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Black’s Law Dictionary 927 (6th ed.1990); see also Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., (distinguishing statutes of limitation from statutes of repose).
Koes v. Advanced Design, Inc. 636 N.W.2d 352 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Koes v. Advanced Design, Inc. 636 N.W.2d 352 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Black’s Law Dictionary 927 (6th ed.1990); see also Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., (distinguishing statutes of limitation from statutes of repose).
Conwed Corp. v. Union Carbide Chemicals & Plastics Co. 634 N.W.2d 401 Minn. 2001
Conwed Corp. v. Union Carbide Chemicals & Plastics Co. 634 N.W.2d 401 Minn. 2001
6 (2000); Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
Myers v. Hearth Technologies, Inc. 621 N.W.2d 787 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Myers v. Hearth Technologies, Inc. 621 N.W.2d 787 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
In Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., the Minnesota Supreme Court found that one of the factors relevant to a post-sale failure-to-warn claim is whether the seller either knows or reasonably should know that the product poses a substantial risk of harm.
Trapp v. Hancuh 587 N.W.2d 61 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Trapp v. Hancuh 587 N.W.2d 61 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
1(b); Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., , 841 n. 17 (Minn.1988) (not necessary for both parties to make valid offer for offer-counteroffer provision to apply).
Phong Thi Doan v. Medtronic, Inc. 560 N.W.2d 100 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Phong Thi Doan v. Medtronic, Inc. 560 N.W.2d 100 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
13, 1987), disagreed with on other grounds by Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., , 841 n. 17 (Minn.1988).
Nugent v. Kerr 543 N.W.2d 688 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Nugent v. Kerr 543 N.W.2d 688 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
See, e.g., Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., (court hesitant to grant new trial solely on punitive damages issue and chose to remit punitive damages award), cert.
Jackson v. Zurich American Insurance Co. 542 N.W.2d 621 Minn. 1996
Jackson v. Zurich American Insurance Co. 542 N.W.2d 621 Minn. 1996
See Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
Rosenbloom v. Flygare 501 N.W.2d 597 Minn. 1993
Rosenbloom v. Flygare 501 N.W.2d 597 Minn. 1993
See Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.
Independent School District No. 622 v. Keene Corp. 495 N.W.2d 244 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Independent School District No. 622 v. Keene Corp. 495 N.W.2d 244 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., cert.
Buysse v. Baumann-Furrie & Co. 498 N.W.2d 289 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Buysse v. Baumann-Furrie & Co. 498 N.W.2d 289 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co., , 841 n. 17 (Minn.1988), ce rt.
Krutsch v. Walter H. Collin GmBh Verfahrenstechnik Und Maschinenfabric 495 N.W.2d 208 Minn. Ct. App. 1993