Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Stubbs v. North Memorial Medical Center, 448 N.W.2d 78.

56 citing documents.

Josh Campion, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Ctr., -81 (Minn. App. 1989) (acknowledging strong public- policy argument for recognition of “cause of action for invasion of privacy,” but stating that court of appeals cannot “establish new causes of action”), rev. denied (Minn. Jan.
Cheryl M. Shega, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Ctr., (explaining that, in declining to recognize a cause of action for the tort of invasion of privacy, “it is not .
Timothy Michaels, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Ctr., rev. denied (Minn. Jan.
Sally Cooper Smith, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
For example, , rev. denied (Minn. Jan.
Pedro Alonzo, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Ctr., rev. denied (Minn. Jan.
In the Appeal of Jared Cunningham re: DHS Appeal for Maltreatment of a Minor. Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Wise v. Stonebridge Cmtys., LLC 927 N.W.2d 772 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Wise v. Stonebridge Cmtys., LLC 927 N.W.2d 772 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
81 (Minn. App. 1989), review denied (Minn. Jan.
White Bear Lake Restoration Ass'n ex rel. State v. Minn. Dep't of Natural Res. 928 N.W.2d 351 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
White Bear Lake Restoration Ass'n ex rel. State v. Minn. Dep't of Natural Res. 928 N.W.2d 351 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
81 (Minn. App. 1989) (stating that it is not the function of this court to establish new causes of action), review denied (Minn. Jan.
Oluf Johnson, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Ctr., –81 (Minn. App. 1989), review denied (Minn. Jan.
Crow Wing Cooperative Power and Light Company, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Ctr., -81 (Minn. App. 1989), review denied (Minn. Jan.
In Re the Matter of the Application of: John Doe for a Change of Birthdate to April 10, … Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Ctr ., -81 (Minn. App. 1989), review denied (Minn. Jan.
Jane Doe v. Kmart Corporation Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Jane Doe v. Kmart Corporation Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Ctr., (affirming summary judgment, in part, because 5 Lickteig notes the same two limited circumstances raised in Carlson; additionally, Lickteig notes that a plaintiff may recover emotional distress damages for wilful, wanton, or malicious conduct that results in a direct invasion of a plaintiff’
In re the Marriage of: Carol Lee D'Costa v. Joseph Francis D'Costa Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In re the Marriage of: Carol Lee D'Costa v. Joseph Francis D'Costa Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Ctr., review denied (Minn. Jan.
Graphic Communications Local 1B Health & Welfare Fund "A" v. CVS Caremark Corp. 833 N.W.2d 403 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Graphic Communications Local 1B Health & Welfare Fund "A" v. CVS Caremark Corp. 833 N.W.2d 403 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Ctr., (“It is not, however, the function of this court to establish new causes of action.”), review denied (Minn. Jan.
Dukowitz v. Hannon Security Services 815 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Dukowitz v. Hannon Security Services 815 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Center, (explaining, in declining to recognize cause of action for invasion of privacy, that “it is not the function of this court to establish new causes of action”), review denied (Minn. Jan.
Glorvigen v. Cirrus Design Corp. 796 N.W.2d 541 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Glorvigen v. Cirrus Design Corp. 796 N.W.2d 541 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Ctr., (stating that it is not the function of the court of appeals to establish new causes of action), review denied (Minn. Jan.
Jane Doe 43C v. Diocese of New Ulm 787 N.W.2d 680 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Jane Doe 43C v. Diocese of New Ulm 787 N.W.2d 680 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Ctr., -81 (Minn.App.1989), review denied (Minn. Jan.
Larson v. Wasemiller 718 N.W.2d 461 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Larson v. Wasemiller 718 N.W.2d 461 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Ctr., 83 (Minn.App.1989) (refusing to create a cause of action that had not been recognized by the courts or established by the legislature because “[t]he function of this court is primarily decisional and error correcting, rather than legislative or doctrinal”), review denied (Minn. Jan.
Brown-Wilbert, Inc. v. Copeland Buhl & Co., P.L.L.P. 715 N.W.2d 484 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Brown-Wilbert, Inc. v. Copeland Buhl & Co., P.L.L.P. 715 N.W.2d 484 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Ctr., -81 (Minn.App.1989) (noting that it is not the function of the court of appeals to establish new causes of action, even when such actions appear to have merit), review denied (Minn. Jan.
Mutual Service Casualty Insurance Co. v. Midway Massage, Inc. 695 N.W.2d 138 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Mutual Service Casualty Insurance Co. v. Midway Massage, Inc. 695 N.W.2d 138 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Ctr., review denied (Minn. Jan.
Engler v. Wehmas 633 N.W.2d 868 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Flynn v. American Home Products Corp. 627 N.W.2d 342 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Flynn v. American Home Products Corp. 627 N.W.2d 342 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Ctr., review denied (Minn. Jan.
Eason v. Independent School District No. 11 598 N.W.2d 414 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Eason v. Independent School District No. 11 598 N.W.2d 414 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Ctr., review denied (Minn. Jan.
Deli v. University of Minnesota 578 N.W.2d 779 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
Deli v. University of Minnesota 578 N.W.2d 779 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
D.A.B. v. Brown 570 N.W.2d 168 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
D.A.B. v. Brown 570 N.W.2d 168 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Ctr., (declining, as error-correcting court, to recognize cause of action that has not been recognized previously by courts or created by legislative action), review denied *172 (Minn. Jan.
Lake v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 566 N.W.2d 376 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Lake v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. 566 N.W.2d 376 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Moreover, review denied (Minn. Jan.
Femrite v. Abbott Northwestern Hospital 568 N.W.2d 535 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Femrite v. Abbott Northwestern Hospital 568 N.W.2d 535 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
(noting, without deciding, that no private cause of action may exist under Patients Bill of Rights), review denied (Minn. Jan.
Zagaros v. Erickson 558 N.W.2d 516 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Zagaros v. Erickson 558 N.W.2d 516 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Ctr., (affirming summary judgment against plaintiff on claims of invasion of privacy by physician and tortious breach of physician/client relationship), review denied (Minn. Jan.
County of Morrison v. Litke 558 N.W.2d 16 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
County of Morrison v. Litke 558 N.W.2d 16 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Ctr., *19 -81 (Minn.App.1989) (it is not the function of the court of appeals to establish new causes of action, even when such actions have merit), review denied (Minn. Jan.
Copeland v. Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc. 526 N.W.2d 402 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Copeland v. Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc. 526 N.W.2d 402 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
See Hendry v. Conner, 303 Minn. 317, 319 , House v. Sports Films & Talents, Inc., -81 (Minn.App.1989).

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by