Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Wilken v. International Harvester Co., 363 N.W.2d 763.

25 citing documents.

Sundby v. City of St. Peter 693 N.W.2d 206 Minn. 2005
Sundby v. City of St. Peter 693 N.W.2d 206 Minn. 2005
Wilken v. Int’l Harvester Co.
In Re Approval of Settlement & Distribution of Wrongful Death Proceeds for the Next of Kin of Markuson 685 N.W.2d 697 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
In Re Approval of Settlement & Distribution of Wrongful Death Proceeds for the Next of Kin of Markuson 685 N.W.2d 697 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
See Wilken v. Int’l Harvester Co., -68 (Minn.1985).
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
v. Anderson, (holding that employer’s insurer who provided workers’ compensation benefits to employee but did not consent to employee’s settlement with third-party tortfeasor may “maintain an action for payments that become payable in the future”); see also Wilken v. Int’l Harvester, -68 (Minn.1985) (holding that a trial court should calculate an employer’s contribution due for the third party’s future payments by using affidavits and other evidence to determine a lump sum amount and reduce the
Drake v. Reile's Transfer & Delivery, Inc. 613 N.W.2d 428 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Drake v. Reile's Transfer & Delivery, Inc. 613 N.W.2d 428 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
See, e.g., Albert v. Paper Calmenson & Co., (holding that a negligent employer’s contribution to third-party tortfeasor is limited by the amount of workers’ compensation benefits paid); Wilken v. Int’l Harvester Co., (holding negligent employer must contribute its share of employee’s tort recovery, up to amount of workers’ compensation benefits paid); Horton by Horton v. Orbeth, Inc., (same); Kordosky v. Conway Fire & Safety, Inc., (affirming redu
Schlichte v. Kielan 599 N.W.2d 185 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Albert v. Paper Calmenson & Co. 515 N.W.2d 59 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Albert v. Paper Calmenson & Co. 515 N.W.2d 59 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Sys., Inc., Kordosky, d at 619, 621 ; Horton by Horton v. Orbeth, Inc., -15 (Minn.1984); -66, 767, 770 (Minn. 1985); Kempa, d at 420-21 .
Tyroll v. Private Label Chemicals, Inc. 505 N.W.2d 54 Minn. 1993
Tyroll v. Private Label Chemicals, Inc. 505 N.W.2d 54 Minn. 1993
McBride v. BLACKTOP 422 N.W.2d 255 Minn. 1988
McBride v. BLACKTOP 422 N.W.2d 255 Minn. 1988
United Steelworkers, Local 6115 v. Quadna Mountain Corp. 418 N.W.2d 723 Minn. 1988
United Steelworkers, Local 6115 v. Quadna Mountain Corp. 418 N.W.2d 723 Minn. 1988
Dahlbeck v. New London Concrete 400 N.W.2d 736 Minn. 1987
Explained Dahlbeck v. New London Concrete 400 N.W.2d 736 Minn. 1987
As we explained, however, the employer’s role in the payment of supplementary benefits is not that of a primary obligor, but simply that of conduit for payments.
Kempa v. E.W. Coons Co. 391 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Kempa v. E.W. Coons Co. 391 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
See D. Dobbs, Law of Remedies § 3.5, at 178 (West 1973); (only future worker’s compensation benefits are reduced to present value when calculating employer’s future contribution obligation).
Kempa v. E.W. Coons Co. 370 N.W.2d 414 Minn. 1985
Kempa v. E.W. Coons Co. 370 N.W.2d 414 Minn. 1985
under the rationale of Lambertson, supra, “the negligent employer’s contribution obligation is used to offset that employer’s right of subrogation for benefits paid and its right of credit for future benefits payable.” Wilken, d at 767 .
Haase v. Haase 369 N.W.2d 311 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Haase v. Haase 369 N.W.2d 311 Minn. Ct. App. 1985