Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Leaon v. Washington County, 397 N.W.2d 867.

53 citing documents.

Austin Frederick Hoover v. Turf Tye Spicer, Custom Fabricating & Repair, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Hollis J. Larson v. The Minnesota Department of Human Services, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2018
(Concluding that weight loss, depression, anger, fear, and bitterness were insufficient to show physical injury).
Misty Jensen v. Susan Arndt, as Personal Representative for the Estate of Charles A. McQuinn, Deceased Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Thus, to recover on a n NIED claim, a plaintiff must “exhibit[] physical manifestations of the emotional distress.”
Jane Doe, et al v. Kmart Corporation, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Jane Doe, et al v. Kmart Corporation, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(affirming district court’s decision to deny motion to amend to add emotional-distress claim where symptoms alleged were weight loss, depression and negative feelings); see also Elstrom v. Ind.
Jason Jalony Cox v. Dakota County, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Jason Jalony Cox v. Dakota County, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2015
But importantly, “[f]or respondeat superior to lie, there must be, first, an actor personally liable for the tort, and, second, the actor must be within the scope of the employment by the employer.”
Langeslag v. KYMN Inc. 664 N.W.2d 860 Minn. 2003
Langeslag v. KYMN Inc. 664 N.W.2d 860 Minn. 2003
She would step up to [Eddy’s] face and yell at him.” Langeslag argues that her conduct was nothing more than occurs in an everyday workplace argument
Zaluckyj v. Rice Creek Watershed District 639 N.W.2d 70 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Zaluckyj v. Rice Creek Watershed District 639 N.W.2d 70 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Stephens v. Board of Regents of University of Minnesota 614 N.W.2d 764 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Stephens v. Board of Regents of University of Minnesota 614 N.W.2d 764 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Witzman v. Lehrman, Lehrman & Flom 601 N.W.2d 179 Minn. 1999
Witzman v. Lehrman, Lehrman & Flom 601 N.W.2d 179 Minn. 1999
(holding that the facts failed to support a valid claim based on section 876); (same).
Pine Valley Meats, Inc. v. Canal Capital Corp. 566 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Pine Valley Meats, Inc. v. Canal Capital Corp. 566 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
A notice of review is the proper mechanism for a respondent to raise issues on which it is adverse to the appellant, but it is not the proper route for a respondent to raise issues on which it is adverse to a
Oslin v. State 543 N.W.2d 408 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Oslin v. State 543 N.W.2d 408 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
We conclude, however, as did the trial court, that Gary Grimm’s acts during the Christmas party did not occur within the “work-related limits of time and space.” The supreme court addressed a
Cooney v. Hooks 535 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 1995
Cooney v. Hooks 535 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 1995
United Products Corp. v. Atlas Auto Parts 529 N.W.2d 401 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
United Products Corp. v. Atlas Auto Parts 529 N.W.2d 401 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
(special relationship creating duty to control exists between landowner and third party who enters land if landowner knows or has reason to know (a) that it has the ability to control third party and (b) of the need and opportunity *404 to exercise that control); see also Erickson v. Curtis Inv.
K.A.C. v. Benson 527 N.W.2d 553 Minn. 1995
K.A.C. v. Benson 527 N.W.2d 553 Minn. 1995
Iacona v. Schrupp 521 N.W.2d 70 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Iacona v. Schrupp 521 N.W.2d 70 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
see also Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Gottshall, — U.S. -, - -, 114 S.Ct.
Carlson v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. 520 N.W.2d 534 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Carlson v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. 520 N.W.2d 534 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
see also Consolidated Rail Corp. v. Gottshall, — U.S. —, —, 114 S.Ct.
Hempel v. Fairview Hospitals & Healthcare Services, Inc. 504 N.W.2d 487 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Hempel v. Fairview Hospitals & Healthcare Services, Inc. 504 N.W.2d 487 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Quill v. Trans World Airlines, Inc., -43 (Minn.App.1985), pet.
Pearson v. Henkemeyer 503 N.W.2d 504 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Pearson v. Henkemeyer 503 N.W.2d 504 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Strauss v. Thorne 490 N.W.2d 908 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Strauss v. Thorne 490 N.W.2d 908 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Covey v. Detroit Lakes Printing Co. 490 N.W.2d 138 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Covey v. Detroit Lakes Printing Co. 490 N.W.2d 138 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Silberstein v. Cordie 474 N.W.2d 850 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Silberstein v. Cordie 474 N.W.2d 850 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Markgraf v. Douglas Corp. 468 N.W.2d 80 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Markgraf v. Douglas Corp. 468 N.W.2d 80 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
13, 1987); (The wife of person in *84 “zone of danger” could not recover because the wife herself was not in “zone of danger”).
Johnson v. Soo Line Railroad 463 N.W.2d 894 Minn. 1990
Johnson v. Soo Line Railroad 463 N.W.2d 894 Minn. 1990
But, Rule 9.08 is not intended to give a plaintiff extra time to name a defendant known to the plaintiff.
Johnson v. Soo Line Railroad 454 N.W.2d 468 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Johnson v. Soo Line Railroad 454 N.W.2d 468 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Olmscheid v. Paterson 440 N.W.2d 124 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Olmscheid v. Paterson 440 N.W.2d 124 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
2 The Minnesota Supreme Court addressed a claim similar to Intervenor’s
Kampsen v. County of Kandiyohi 426 N.W.2d 917 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Kampsen v. County of Kandiyohi 426 N.W.2d 917 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
a deputy sheriff brought suit against the county and others alleging false imprisonment, battery, negligent infliction of emotional distress and several other charges.
State Ex Rel. Woyke v. Tonka Corp. 420 N.W.2d 624 Minn. Ct. App. 1988