Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Wright v. City of St. Cloud, 55 N.W. 819.

46 citing documents.

Olson v. City of St. James 380 N.W.2d 555 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Olson v. City of St. James 380 N.W.2d 555 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94, 98-99 , 55 N.W.
City of Tucson v. Holliday 411 P.2d 183 Ariz. Ct. App. Div. 2 1966
Tatro v. Carlson 137 N.W.2d 187 Minn. 1965
Tatro v. Carlson 137 N.W.2d 187 Minn. 1965
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94 , , plaintiff sustained injuries when she fell on a public sidewalk upon which ice had accumulated.
Hansen v. City of Minneapolis 113 N.W.2d 508 Minn. 1962
Bury v. City of Minneapolis 102 N.W.2d 706 Minn. 1960
Bury v. City of Minneapolis 102 N.W.2d 706 Minn. 1960
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94, 97 , , 820: “* * * What reasonable care might require in a milder climate * * * might be too high a standard in this climate, * * The law is well settled that the existence of dangerous ridges, hummocks, and irregularities may give rise to actionable negligence against a municipality when injuries are oc
Donald v. Moses 94 N.W.2d 255 Minn. 1959
Donald v. Moses 94 N.W.2d 255 Minn. 1959
Rudd v. Village of Bovey 89 N.W.2d 689 Minn. 1958
Rudd v. Village of Bovey 89 N.W.2d 689 Minn. 1958
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94 , , where it was held: “If a person, with full and present knowledge of the defective condition of a sidewalk, and of the risks incident to its use, voluntarily attempts to travel upon it, when the defect could easily, and without appreciable inconvenience, have been avoided by going around it, he is not
Hubenette v. Ostby 6 N.W.2d 637 Minn. 1942
Hubenette v. Ostby 6 N.W.2d 637 Minn. 1942
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94 , ; Herdman v. Zwart, 167 Iowa 500 , .
Campion v. City of Rochester 277 N.W. 422 Minn. 1938
Campion v. City of Rochester 277 N.W. 422 Minn. 1938
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94 , ; McGandy v. City of Marshall, 178 Minn. 326 , ; Friday v. City of Moor- *138 head, 84 Minn. 273 , ; Anderson v. City of St.
Mesberg v. City of Duluth 254 N.W. 597 Minn. 1934
Mesberg v. City of Duluth 254 N.W. 597 Minn. 1934
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94, 97 , , 820: “In this climate * * the duty of cities with respect to ice and snow must necessarily be somewhat limited, and care should be taken that they be not held to a degree of diligence beyond what is reasonable, in view of their situation.
McDonough v. City of St. Paul 330 N.W. 89 Minn. 1930
McDonough v. City of St. Paul 330 N.W. 89 Minn. 1930
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94 , ; Friday v. City of Moorhead, 84 Minn. 273 , ; and Piscor v. Village of Hibbing, 169 Minn. 478 , .
McGandy v. City of Marshall 227 N.W. 177 Minn. 1929
McGandy v. City of Marshall 227 N.W. 177 Minn. 1929
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94 , , plaintiff looked and saw the exact condition of the walk and realized the danger, and was held negligent as a matter of law.
Niemi v. Village of Hibbing 221 N.W. 241 Minn. 1928
Niemi v. Village of Hibbing 221 N.W. 241 Minn. 1928
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94 , ; Smith v. City of Cloquet, 120 Minn. 50 , ; McClain v. City of Duluth, 163 Minn. 198 , .
Piscor v. Village of Hibbing 211 N.W. 952 Minn. 1927
Piscor v. Village of Hibbing 211 N.W. 952 Minn. 1927
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94 , 55 N.W.
Freeman v. Village of Hibbing 211 N.W. 819 Minn. 1926
Freeman v. Village of Hibbing 211 N.W. 819 Minn. 1926
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94 , ; Smith v. City of Cloquet, 120 Minn. 50 , .
Nichols v. Village of Buhl 193 N.W. 28 Minn. 1922
Nichols v. Village of Buhl 193 N.W. 28 Minn. 1922
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94 , Smith v. City of Cloquet, 120 Minn. 50 , ; Genereau v. City of Duluth, 131 Minn. 92 , .
Olson v. City of St. Paul 170 N.W. 586 Minn. 1919
Olson v. City of St. Paul 170 N.W. 586 Minn. 1919
Anderson v. City of Minneapolis 165 N.W. 134 Minn. 1917
Anderson v. City of Minneapolis 165 N.W. 134 Minn. 1917
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94 , , and Smith v. City of Cloquet, 120 Minn. 50 , , the complaint would seem to state a cause of action, and the learned trial court so held.
Genereau v. City of Duluth 154 N.W. 664 Minn. 1915
Genereau v. City of Duluth 154 N.W. 664 Minn. 1915
Smith v. City of Cloquet 139 N.W. 141 Minn. 1912
Smith v. City of Cloquet 139 N.W. 141 Minn. 1912
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94 , ; Keane v. Village, 130 N. Y. 188 , 29 N. E. 130 ; McAuley v. City, 113 Mass. 503 ; Broburg v. City, 63 Iowa, 523 , , 50 Am.
Hufman v. City of Crookston 129 N.W. 219 Minn. 1911
Hufman v. City of Crookston 129 N.W. 219 Minn. 1911
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94 , , and Friday v. City of Moorhead, 84 Minn. 273 , , are not in point.
Friday v. City of Moorhead 87 N.W. 780 Minn. 1901
Friday v. City of Moorhead 87 N.W. 780 Minn. 1901
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94 , , and Anderson v. City of St.
Taylor v. City of Mankato 83 N.W. 1084 Minn. 1900
Taylor v. City of Mankato 83 N.W. 1084 Minn. 1900
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94, 54 .
Lawson v. Truesdale 62 N.W. 546 Minn. 1895
Lawson v. Truesdale 62 N.W. 546 Minn. 1895
Cloud, 54 Minn. 94 , , is broad enough to cover and include the conditions found here, and to relieve their client from liability; and also that the principle for which they contend is clearly recognized in Blais v. Minneapolis & St.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by