Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Harder v. City of Minneapolis, 42 N.W. 350.

26 citing documents.

Olander v. Sperry and Hutchinson Company 197 N.W.2d 438 Minn. 1972
Olander v. Sperry and Hutchinson Company 197 N.W.2d 438 Minn. 1972
Paul, 116 Minn. 249 , Larkin v. City of Minneapolis, 112 Minn. 311 , Kandelin v. City of Ely, 110 Minn. 55 , Lyons v. City of Red Wing, 76 Minn. 20 , Harder v. City of Minneapolis, 40 Minn. 446
Grams v. Independent School District No. 742 176 N.W.2d 536 Minn. 1970
Grams v. Independent School District No. 742 176 N.W.2d 536 Minn. 1970
In Harder v. City of Minneapolis, 40 Minn. 446 , , the notice of claim was held valid even though, in describing the accident area by reference to contiguous streets, one of the streets was erroneously named.
Russell v. City of Minneapolis 107 N.W.2d 711 Minn. 1961
Russell v. City of Minneapolis 107 N.W.2d 711 Minn. 1961
Harder v. City of Minneapolis, 40 Minn. 446 , ; Brittain v. City of Minneapolis, 250 Minn. 376 , 84 N. W. (2d) 646 .
Brittain v. City of Minneapolis 84 N.W.2d 646 Minn. 1957
Brittain v. City of Minneapolis 84 N.W.2d 646 Minn. 1957
In Harder v. City of Minneapolis, 40 Minn. 446 , , the notice of claim was held valid even though, in describing the accident area by reference to contiguous streets, one of the streets was erroneously named.
Larson v. City of Mankato 59 N.W.2d 312 Minn. 1953
Larson v. City of Mankato 59 N.W.2d 312 Minn. 1953
Paul, 116 Minn. 249 , ; Lyons v. City of Red Wing, 76 Minn. 20 , ; Harder v. City of Minneapolis, 40 Minn. 446 , .
Louko v. Village of Hibbing 25 N.W.2d 234 Minn. 1946
Louko v. Village of Hibbing 25 N.W.2d 234 Minn. 1946
1913A, 668: “* * * Its purpose [that of the notice] is served if it directs the proper authorities to the place of the accident,, so that they may intelligently investigate and pass on any claims arising therefrom, and, if necessary, prepare for the defense in a suit.” See, also, Harder v. City of Minneapolis, 40 Minn. 446 , ; Lyons v. City of Bed Wing, 76 Minn. 20 , .
Hebert v. Village of Hibbing 212 N.W. 186 Minn. 1927
Hebert v. Village of Hibbing 212 N.W. 186 Minn. 1927
Paul, supra; Kandelin v. City of Ely, 110 Minn. 55 , ; Harder v. City of Minneapolis, 40 Minn. 446 , .
Boyd v. City of Duluth 204 N.W. 562 Minn. 1925
Boyd v. City of Duluth 204 N.W. 562 Minn. 1925
The rule applicable to notices of this kind is stated in Harder v. City of Minneapolis, 40 Minn. 446, 448 , : *65 “A notice of this character ought not to he construed with technical strictness.
Larkin v. City of Minneapolis 127 N.W. 1129 Minn. 1910
Larkin v. City of Minneapolis 127 N.W. 1129 Minn. 1910
“A notice of this character ought not to be construed with technical strictness.” Harder v. City of Minneapolis, 40 Minn. 446 , .
Kandelin v. City of Ely 124 N.W. 449 Minn. 1910
Kandelin v. City of Ely 124 N.W. 449 Minn. 1910
The place of the accident was sufficiently indicated: Harder v. City of Minne *59 apolis, 40 Minn. 446 , ; Lyons v. City of Red Wing, 76 Minn. 20 , .
Lyons v. City of Red Wing 78 N.W. 868 Minn. 1899
Lyons v. City of Red Wing 78 N.W. 868 Minn. 1899
Harder v. City of Minneapolis, 40 Minn. 446 , ; Elliott, Roads & S. 475; Tuttle v. Town, 50 Conn. 496 ; Spellman v. Inhabitants, 131 Mass. 443 .
Bausher v. City of St. Paul 75 N.W. 745 Minn. 1898
Bausher v. City of St. Paul 75 N.W. 745 Minn. 1898
Nichols v. City of Minneapolis, 30 Minn. 545 , ; Harder v. City of Minneapolis, 40 Minn. 446 , .
McDevitt v. City of St. Paul 68 N.W. 178 Minn. 1896
McDevitt v. City of St. Paul 68 N.W. 178 Minn. 1896
As to the object in requiring notice to be given, and the proper construction to be placed upon the section itself, see Nichols v. City of Minneapolis, 30 Minn. 545 , ; Harder v. City of Minneapolis, 40 Minn. 446 , .

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by