12 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 1983–2026 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Minnesota courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Plutshack Ex Rel. Plutshack v. University of Minnesota Hospitalsgreen2 sentences2007Bigay v. Garvey, 575 N.W.2d 107, 111, n. 4 (Minn.1998) (quoting Plutshack v. Univ. of Minn. Hosps., 316 N.W.2d 1, 5 (Minn.1982)). 2007Bigay v. Garvey, 575 N.W.2d 107, 111, n. 4 (Minn.1998) (quoting Plutshack v. Univ. of Minn. Hosps., 316 N.W.2d 1, 5 (Minn. 1982)). | 3 | 4 |
Brown-Wilbert, Inc. v. Copeland Buhl & Co.green2 sentences2015Brown-Wilbert, Inc. v. Copeland Buhl & Co., 732 N.W.2d 209, 219 (Minn.2007). 2014The second and third Brown-Wilbert elements require the affidavit or interrogatory to “describe[] the expert’s opinion on the applicable standard of care, as recognized by the professional community [and to] explain[] the expert’s opinion that the defendant departed from that standard.” Id. | 2 | 4 |
MacRae v. Group Health Plan, Inc.green1 sentence2026Health Plan, Inc., 753 N.W.2d 711, 717 (Minn. 2008) (stating that the prima facie case for medical malpractice requires (1) a showing of the applicable standard of care, (2) that the defendant departed from that standard, and (3) “that the defendant’s departure from the standard was a direct cause of the patient’s injuries”); see also Minn. Stat. § 145.682 (2024) (setting out expert-review and -disclosure requirements for medical-malpractice actions that reflect the required elements of a prima facie case). | 1 | 1 |
Tousignant v. ST. LOUIS COUNTY, MNgreen2 sentences2024Louis County, 615 N.W.2d 53, 59 (Minn. 2000) (quotation omitted). 2024Louis County, 615 N.W.2d 53, 59 (Minn. 2000) (quotation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Bigay v. Garveygreen2 sentences2007Bigay v. Garvey, 575 N.W.2d 107, 111, n. 4 (Minn.1998) (quoting Plutshack v. Univ. of Minn. Hosps., 316 N.W.2d 1, 5 (Minn.1982)). 2007Bigay v. Garvey, 575 N.W.2d 107, 111, n. 4 (Minn.1998) (quoting Plutshack v. Univ. of Minn. Hosps., 316 N.W.2d 1, 5 (Minn. 1982)). | 1 | 1 |
Fabio v. Bellomogreen1 sentence2004In actions against health-care providers, a prima facie case of malpractice is established by showing “(1) the standard of care recognized by the medical community as applicable to the particular defendant, (2) that the defendant departed from that standard, and (3) that the defendant’s departure was a direct cause of the plaintiffs injuries.” Fabio v. Bellomo, 504 N.W.2d 758, 762 (Minn.1993). | 1 | 1 |
Reinhardt v. Coltongreen1 sentence2000Reinhardt v. Colton, 337 N.W.2d 88, 94 (Minn.1983). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.