Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Lewis v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States, 389 N.W.2d 876.

226 citing documents.

Thies v. St. Paul's Evangelical Lutheran Church of Litchfield 489 N.W.2d 277 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Lewis v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc’y of the United States, Apache Plaza, Ltd. v. Midwest Savings Ass’n, pet.
Lindgren v. Harmon Glass Co. 489 N.W.2d 804 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Lindgren v. Harmon Glass Co. 489 N.W.2d 804 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Cf. Pine River, d at 631 (handbook created disciplinary procedure which was to precede any termination); Lewis v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc’y, (handbook defined type of misconduct necessary to support termination, and set up three-step disciplinary procedure prior to termination).
Campbell v. Leaseway Customized Transport, Inc. 484 N.W.2d 41 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Campbell v. Leaseway Customized Transport, Inc. 484 N.W.2d 41 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Lewis v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc’y
Brooks v. Doherty, Rumble & Butler 481 N.W.2d 120 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Brooks v. Doherty, Rumble & Butler 481 N.W.2d 120 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
See Lewis v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc’y
Michaelson v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co. 474 N.W.2d 174 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Michaelson v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co. 474 N.W.2d 174 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
See Lewis v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc’y, (handbook provision on dismissal was “definite enough to permit a jury to conclude that plaintiffs received certain con *180 tractual rights”); Hunt, d at 855, 857 (vague language regarding discipline and discharge procedures did not create an offer of a unilateral contract).
Wilson v. Weight Watchers of Upper Midwest, Inc. 474 N.W.2d 380 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Wilson v. Weight Watchers of Upper Midwest, Inc. 474 N.W.2d 380 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Muehlstedt v. City of Lino Lakes 473 N.W.2d 892 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Muehlstedt v. City of Lino Lakes 473 N.W.2d 892 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Lewis v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc’y, -92 (Minn.1986).
Bradley v. Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc. 471 N.W.2d 670 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Bradley v. Hubbard Broadcasting, Inc. 471 N.W.2d 670 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
See Lewis v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc’y
Britton v. Koep 470 N.W.2d 518 Minn. 1991
Britton v. Koep 470 N.W.2d 518 Minn. 1991
Restatement (Second) of Torts § 558 (1977); see, e.g., Lewis v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc’y
Weissman v. Sri Lanka Curry House, Inc. 469 N.W.2d 471 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Weissman v. Sri Lanka Curry House, Inc. 469 N.W.2d 471 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Lund v. Chicago & Northwestern Transportation Co. 467 N.W.2d 366 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Hunt v. University of Minnesota 465 N.W.2d 88 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Hunt v. University of Minnesota 465 N.W.2d 88 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Lewis v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc’y
McIntire v. State 458 N.W.2d 714 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
McIntire v. State 458 N.W.2d 714 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
See Lewis v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States , , 888 (Minn. 1986).
Apache Plaza, Ltd. v. Midwest Savings Ass'n 456 N.W.2d 729 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Apache Plaza, Ltd. v. Midwest Savings Ass'n 456 N.W.2d 729 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Diesen v. Hessburg 455 N.W.2d 446 Minn. 1990
Halla Nursery, Inc. v. Baumann-Furrie & Co. 454 N.W.2d 905 Minn. 1990
Halla Nursery, Inc. v. Baumann-Furrie & Co. 454 N.W.2d 905 Minn. 1990
Co., this court, while not expressly so holding, assumed that even if an affirmative misstatement of law in an instruction was fundamental error, the appellant could not demonstrate in the record that such error had changed the outcome of the case or otherwise prejudiced it.
Diesen v. Hessburg 455 N.W.2d 446 Minn. 1990
We have held on numerous occasions that truth is a complete defense to defamation and “true statements, however disparaging, are not actionable.” Stuempges v. Parke, Davis & Co., (employer’s statements about work record of former employee deemed false and defamatory); see also Lewis v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc’y
Bucko v. First Minnesota Savings Bank, F.S.B. 452 N.W.2d 244 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Bucko v. First Minnesota Savings Bank, F.S.B. 452 N.W.2d 244 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
3265 , 106 L.Ed.2d 610 (1989); -92 (Minn.1986).
Wirig v. Kinney Shoe Corp. 448 N.W.2d 526 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Wirig v. Kinney Shoe Corp. 448 N.W.2d 526 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Gunnufson v. Onan Corp. 450 N.W.2d 179 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Gunnufson v. Onan Corp. 450 N.W.2d 179 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Foley v. WCCO Television, Inc. 449 N.W.2d 497 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Foley v. WCCO Television, Inc. 449 N.W.2d 497 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Connelly v. Northwest Publications, Inc. 448 N.W.2d 901 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Connelly v. Northwest Publications, Inc. 448 N.W.2d 901 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Nhep v. Roisen 446 N.W.2d 425 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Nhep v. Roisen 446 N.W.2d 425 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Clough v. Ertz 442 N.W.2d 798 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Clough v. Ertz 442 N.W.2d 798 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Appellant also claims damages for defamation
Halla Nursery, Inc. v. Baumann-Furrie & Co. 438 N.W.2d 400 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Halla Nursery, Inc. v. Baumann-Furrie & Co. 438 N.W.2d 400 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
51 (instruction errors involving “fundamental law or controlling principle may be assigned in a motion for a new trial though it was not otherwise called to the attention of the court”); (“Fundamental errors of law in jury instructions are reviewable on appeal so long as they have been assigned as errors in the motion for new trial.”).
Karnes v. Milo Beauty & Barber Supply Co. 441 N.W.2d 565 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Karnes v. Milo Beauty & Barber Supply Co. 441 N.W.2d 565 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
They recognize that truth as a defense must go to the underlying implication of the statement “at least where the statement involves more than a simple allegation.”
Diesen v. Hessburg 437 N.W.2d 705 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Diesen v. Hessburg 437 N.W.2d 705 Minn. Ct. App. 1989