Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Canada by and Through Landy v. McCarthy, 567 N.W.2d 496.

73 citing documents.

Messan Adjignon, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
“In an ordinary civil action, the plaintiff has the burden of proving damages caused 10 by the defendant by a fair preponderance of the evidence.”
Alvin Glay, trustee for the next of kin of Unity McGill, Respondent/Cross-Appellant v. R.C. of St. Cloud, Inc., … Minn. 2026
Alvin Glay, trustee for the next of kin of Unity McGill, Respondent/Cross-Appellant v. R.C. of St. Cloud, Inc., … Minn. 2026
(emphasis added) (citing Wartnick v. Moss & Barnett, (internal quotation marks omitted)).
Jerome E. Johnson, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Craig A. Reichel v. Wendland Utz, LTD Minn. 2024
Craig A. Reichel v. Wendland Utz, LTD Minn. 2024
(Minn. 8 As another court has described: [An attorney] is answerable in damages for any loss to his client which proximately results from a want of that degree of knowledge and skill ordinarily possessed by others of his profession similarly situated, or from the omission to
Tesfaye Shikur, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
(“In an ordinary civil action, the plaintiff has the burden of proving damages caused by the defendant by a fair preponderance of the evidence.”).
Mike Allen Homes, LLC, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
We also note, however, 10 that a plaintiff “bears the burden of proving damages caused by the defendant by a fair preponderance of the evidence.”
Doe 596, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
(“In an ordinary civil action, the plaintiff has the burden of proving damages caused by the defendant by a fair preponderance of the evidence.”); d 418, 430 (Minn. App. 2024) (“A plaintiff carries the burden of proof to est
Distinctive Design Build, LLC v. Thomas Nelson, Installed Building Solutions II, LLC, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Distinctive Design Build, LLC v. Thomas Nelson, Installed Building Solutions II, LLC, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Simon Tharek Duoth, as Trustee and Next of Kin, Taban Tharek v. Steven Mark Wood Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Simon Tharek Duoth, as Trustee and Next of Kin, Taban Tharek v. Steven Mark Wood Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“Generally, negligence claims present questions of fact not susceptible to summary adjudication.” rev. denied (Minn. May 16, 2001)
Susan Schneider, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“In an ordinary civil action, the plaintiff has the burden of proving damages caused by the defendant by a fair preponderance of the evidence.” Canada By & Through Landy v. McCarthy
Anthony Kelley, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Mark D. Island, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Minn. 2021
d 496, 506 (Minn. 1997).
Brothers Fire Protection Co., d/b/a Brothers Fire and Security, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Karmen Michelle Ingersoll, as Trustee for the next of kin of Thomas Wade Ingersoll, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
(citing Canada by Landy v. McCarthy , ).
ARF, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Maethner v. Someplace Safe, Inc. 929 N.W.2d 868 Minn. 2019
Maethner v. Someplace Safe, Inc. 929 N.W.2d 868 Minn. 2019
Landy v. McCarthy , , 505 (Minn. 1997) ("The question of negligence is ordinarily a question of fact and not susceptible to summary adjudication.").
A18-1870 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“In an ordinary civil action, the plaintiff has the burden of proving damages caused by the defendant by a fair preponderance of the evidence.” Canada By &
Olimpia Onofre Cedillo, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Sonja Jeanne Timmons, individually, and as mother and natural guardian of Jadyn Bentlie Haugen, Kaily Marie Timmons and … Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Steven Brown, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Bernadette L. Russell, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“The question of negligence is ordinarily a question of fact and not susceptibl e to summary adjudication.” Canada By &
The Tap House Restaurant Group, LLC, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Canada b y Landy v. McCarthy , .
Randall Norman v. Crow Wing Cooperative Power & Light Company Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Randall Norman v. Crow Wing Cooperative Power & Light Company Minn. Ct. App. 2016
A plaintiff “must demonstrate with reasonable certainty the nature and probable duration of the injuries sustained,” but, “[o]nce the fact of loss has been shown, the difficulty of proving its amount will not preclude recovery so long as there is proof of a reasonable basis upon which to approximate the amount,”
Julie Ann Holtegaard and David William Streng, Co-Trustees for the Next-of-Kin of Bruce Edward Streng v. Soo Line … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Julie Ann Holtegaard and David William Streng, Co-Trustees for the Next-of-Kin of Bruce Edward Streng v. Soo Line … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“[T]he plaintiff has the burden of proving damages caused by the defendant by a fair preponderance of the evidence.”
Eischen v. Crystal Valley Cooperative 835 N.W.2d 629 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Eischen v. Crystal Valley Cooperative 835 N.W.2d 629 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
See Canada By & (“The question of negligence is ordinarily a question of fact and not susceptible to summary adjudication.”).
Poppler v. Wright Hennepin Cooperative Electric Ass'n 834 N.W.2d 527 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Poppler v. Wright Hennepin Cooperative Electric Ass'n 834 N.W.2d 527 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Rasmussen v. Two Harbors Fish Co. 832 N.W.2d 790 Minn. 2013
Johnson v. Paynesville Farmers Union Cooperative Oil Co. 817 N.W.2d 693 Minn. 2012
Renswick v. Wenzel 819 N.W.2d 198 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Renswick v. Wenzel 819 N.W.2d 198 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
A party’s negligence is the proximate cause of an injury if the negligent act was one that the alleged tortfeasor “ought, in the exercise of ordinary care, to have anticipated was likely to result in injury to others” and if his conduct “was a substantial factor in bringing about the injury.” (quotation omitted).
State v. Nelson 806 N.W.2d 558 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
State v. Nelson 806 N.W.2d 558 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
White v. Many Rivers West Ltd. Partnership 797 N.W.2d 739 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
White v. Many Rivers West Ltd. Partnership 797 N.W.2d 739 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
It is true that if a landlord assumes the duty to correct a defect on part of the property when not required by the lease to do so, “the landlord must bear the burden of failure to make a good job of it.” (quotation omitted).
Glorvigen v. Cirrus Design Corp. 796 N.W.2d 541 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Foss v. Kincade 766 N.W.2d 317 Minn. 2009
Foss v. Kincade 766 N.W.2d 317 Minn. 2009
Lietz v. Northern States Power Co. 718 N.W.2d 865 Minn. 2006
Lietz v. Northern States Power Co. 718 N.W.2d 865 Minn. 2006
There is proximate cause between a negligent act and an injury when the act is “ ‘one which the party ought, in the exercise of ordinary care, to have anticipated was likely to result in injury to others.’ ” ().