Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
10 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 1889–2003 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Lowry v. City of Mankatogreen2 sentences2003Lowry , 231 Minn, at 117, 42 N.W.2d at 559 (citations omitted). 2003Lowry, 231 Minn. at 117 , 42 N.W.2d at 559 (citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
Saltou v. Dependable Ins. Co., Inc.green1 sentence1988This court also followed the rule in Saltou v. Dependable Insurance Co. Inc., 394 N.W.2d 629, 633 (Minn.Ct.App.1986), stating that “appellants must show more than malicious failure to pay an insurance claim in order to recover extra-contractual damages.” See also R.L.B. | 1 | 1 |
R.L.B. Enterprises, Inc. v. Liberty National Fire Insurance Co.green1 sentence1988Enterprises, Inc. v. Liberty National Fire Insurance Co., 413 N.W.2d 551, 554 (Minn.Ct.App.1987). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Wileygreen2 sentences1975The prosecution may not, therefore, use at trial that he stood mute or claimed his privilege in the face of accusation.” In State v. Beck, 289 Minn. 287 , 183 N. W. 2d 781 (1971), this court followed this rule and held that it was reversible error to allow a police officer to testify that the Miranda warnings had been given to the defendant, unless such testimony was employed as a foundation for the admission of a confession. 5 Pointer v. Texas, 380 U. S. 400 , 85 S. Ct. 1065 , 13 L. ed. 2d 923 (1965); State v. Jordan, 272 Minn. 84 , 136 N. W. 2d 601 (1965); See, State v. Wiley, 295 Minn. 411 1975The prosecution may not, therefore, use at trial that he stood mute or claimed his privilege in the face of accusation.” In State v. Beck, 289 Minn. 287 , 183 N. W. 2d 781 (1971), this court followed this rule and held that it was reversible error to allow a police officer to testify that the Miranda warnings had been given to the defendant, unless such testimony was employed as a foundation for the admission of a confession. 5 Pointer v. Texas, 380 U. S. 400 , 85 S. Ct. 1065 , 13 L. ed. 2d 923 (1965); State v. Jordan, 272 Minn. 84 , 136 N. W. 2d 601 (1965); See, State v. Wiley, 295 Minn. 411 | 1 | 1 |
Hudson v. Augustine's, Inc.green2 sentences1975The prosecution may not, therefore, use at trial that he stood mute or claimed his privilege in the face of accusation.” In State v. Beck, 289 Minn. 287 , 183 N. W. 2d 781 (1971), this court followed this rule and held that it was reversible error to allow a police officer to testify that the Miranda warnings had been given to the defendant, unless such testimony was employed as a foundation for the admission of a confession. 5 Pointer v. Texas, 380 U. S. 400 , 85 S. Ct. 1065 , 13 L. ed. 2d 923 (1965); State v. Jordan, 272 Minn. 84 , 136 N. W. 2d 601 (1965); See, State v. Wiley, 295 Minn. 411 1975App. 2d 225 , 218 N. E. 2d 510 (1966); Pulver v. Union Inv. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Ellingsongreen2 sentences1971See, also, State v. Clark, supra, and State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208 , 167 N. W. (2d) 55 . 1971See, also, State v. Clark, supra, and State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208 , 167 N. W. (2d) 55 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Jordan
green
2 sentences1975The prosecution may not, therefore, use at trial that he stood mute or claimed his privilege in the face of accusation.” In State v. Beck, 289 Minn. 287 , 183 N. W. 2d 781 (1971), this court followed this rule and held that it was reversible error to allow a police officer to testify that the Miranda warnings had been given to the defendant, unless such testimony was employed as a foundation for the admission of a confession. 5 Pointer v. Texas, 380 U. S. 400 , 85 S. Ct. 1065 , 13 L. ed. 2d 923 (1965); State v. Jordan, 272 Minn. 84 , 136 N. W. 2d 601 (1965); See, State v. Wiley, 295 Minn. 411 1975The prosecution may not, therefore, use at trial that he stood mute or claimed his privilege in the face of accusation.” In State v. Beck, 289 Minn. 287 , 183 N. W. 2d 781 (1971), this court followed this rule and held that it was reversible error to allow a police officer to testify that the Miranda warnings had been given to the defendant, unless such testimony was employed as a foundation for the admission of a confession. 5 Pointer v. Texas, 380 U. S. 400 , 85 S. Ct. 1065 , 13 L. ed. 2d 923 (1965); State v. Jordan, 272 Minn. 84 , 136 N. W. 2d 601 (1965); See, State v. Wiley, 295 Minn. 411 | 1 | 1975–1975 |
Pointer v. Texas
green
2 sentences1975The prosecution may not, therefore, use at trial that he stood mute or claimed his privilege in the face of accusation.” In State v. Beck, 289 Minn. 287 , 183 N. W. 2d 781 (1971), this court followed this rule and held that it was reversible error to allow a police officer to testify that the Miranda warnings had been given to the defendant, unless such testimony was employed as a foundation for the admission of a confession. 5 Pointer v. Texas, 380 U. S. 400 , 85 S. Ct. 1065 , 13 L. ed. 2d 923 (1965); State v. Jordan, 272 Minn. 84 , 136 N. W. 2d 601 (1965); See, State v. Wiley, 295 Minn. 411 1975The prosecution may not, therefore, use at trial that he stood mute or claimed his privilege in the face of accusation.” In State v. Beck, 289 Minn. 287 , 183 N. W. 2d 781 (1971), this court followed this rule and held that it was reversible error to allow a police officer to testify that the Miranda warnings had been given to the defendant, unless such testimony was employed as a foundation for the admission of a confession. 5 Pointer v. Texas, 380 U. S. 400 , 85 S. Ct. 1065 , 13 L. ed. 2d 923 (1965); State v. Jordan, 272 Minn. 84 , 136 N. W. 2d 601 (1965); See, State v. Wiley, 295 Minn. 411 | 1 | 1975–1975 |
State v. Beck
green
2 sentences1975The prosecution may not, therefore, use at trial that he stood mute or claimed his privilege in the face of accusation.” In State v. Beck, 289 Minn. 287 , 183 N. W. 2d 781 (1971), this court followed this rule and held that it was reversible error to allow a police officer to testify that the Miranda warnings had been given to the defendant, unless such testimony was employed as a foundation for the admission of a confession. 5 Pointer v. Texas, 380 U. S. 400 , 85 S. Ct. 1065 , 13 L. ed. 2d 923 (1965); State v. Jordan, 272 Minn. 84 , 136 N. W. 2d 601 (1965); See, State v. Wiley, 295 Minn. 411 1975The prosecution may not, therefore, use at trial that he stood mute or claimed his privilege in the face of accusation.” In State v. Beck, 289 Minn. 287 , 183 N. W. 2d 781 (1971), this court followed this rule and held that it was reversible error to allow a police officer to testify that the Miranda warnings had been given to the defendant, unless such testimony was employed as a foundation for the admission of a confession. 5 Pointer v. Texas, 380 U. S. 400 , 85 S. Ct. 1065 , 13 L. ed. 2d 923 (1965); State v. Jordan, 272 Minn. 84 , 136 N. W. 2d 601 (1965); See, State v. Wiley, 295 Minn. 411 | 1 | 1975–1975 |
Minneapolis Van & Warehouse Co. v. St. Paul Terminal Warehouse Co.
green
2 sentences1972Paul Terminal Warehouse Co. 288 Minn. 294 , 180 N. W. 2d 175 (1970). 6 See, also, Application of Forde L. 1972Paul Terminal Warehouse Co. 288 Minn. 294 , 180 N. W. 2d 175 (1970). 6 See, also, Application of Forde L. | 1 | 1972–1972 |
State v. Burch
green
2 sentences1971This court followed that rule in State v. Burch, 284 Minn. 300 , 170 N. W. (2d) 543 . 1971This court followed that rule in State v. Burch, 284 Minn. 300 , 170 N. W. (2d) 543 . | 1 | 1971–1971 |
Barrett v. Smith
green
2 sentences1945This court followed the rule laid down in Barrett v. Smith, 183 Minn. 431 , 237 N. W. 15 , supra, and held that the appeal from the order was not taken within time. 1945This court followed the rule laid down in Barrett v. Smith, 183 Minn. 431 , 237 N. W. 15 , supra, and held that the appeal from the order was not taken within time. | 1 | 1945–1945 |
Epstein v. Chicago Great Western Railway Co.
green
1 sentence1940This court followed the rule in Mohr v. Williams, 95 Minn. 261 , 104 N. W. 12 , and in discussing the amount of the verdict refused to consider the question as raised by the assignment that the verdict ivas not justified by the evidence and was contrary to law. | 1 | 1940–1940 |
Mohr v. Williams
green
1 sentence1940This court followed the rule in Mohr v. Williams, 95 Minn. 261 , 104 N. W. 12 , and in discussing the amount of the verdict refused to consider the question as raised by the assignment that the verdict ivas not justified by the evidence and was contrary to law. | 1 | 1940–1940 |
Braley v. Byrnes
neutral
1 sentence1922The court followed the rule laid down in Braley v. Byrnes, 25 Minn. 297 ; Bannon v. Bowler, 34 Minn. 416 , 26 N. W. 237 , and other later decisions cited in 1 Dunnell, Minn. Dig. § 1451. | 1 | 1922–1922 |
Bannon v. Bowler
neutral
2 sentences1922The court followed the rule laid down in Braley v. Byrnes, 25 Minn. 297 ; Bannon v. Bowler, 34 Minn. 416 , 26 N. W. 237 , and other later decisions cited in 1 Dunnell, Minn. Dig. § 1451. 1922The court followed the rule laid down in Braley v. Byrnes, 25 Minn. 297 ; Bannon v. Bowler, 34 Minn. 416 , 26 N. W. 237 , and other later decisions cited in 1 Dunnell, Minn. Dig. § 1451. | 1 | 1922–1922 |
Holden v. Stratton
green
1 sentence1921In re Pfaffinger, 164 Fed. 526 ; Holden v. Stratton, 198 U. S. 202 , 25 Sup. Ct. 656, 49 L. ed. 1018; Hiscock v. Mertens, 205 U. S. 202 , 27 Sup. Ct. 488, 51 L. ed. 771. | 1 | 1921–1921 |
Hiscock v. Mertens
green
1 sentence1921In re Pfaffinger, 164 Fed. 526 ; Holden v. Stratton, 198 U. S. 202 , 25 Sup. Ct. 656, 49 L. ed. 1018; Hiscock v. Mertens, 205 U. S. 202 , 27 Sup. Ct. 488, 51 L. ed. 771. | 1 | 1921–1921 |
In re Pfaffinger
neutral
1 sentence1921In re Pfaffinger, 164 Fed. 526 ; Holden v. Stratton, 198 U. S. 202 , 25 Sup. Ct. 656, 49 L. ed. 1018; Hiscock v. Mertens, 205 U. S. 202 , 27 Sup. Ct. 488, 51 L. ed. 771. | 1 | 1921–1921 |
Horton v. Chadbourn
neutral
1 sentence1889Horton v. Chadbourn, 31 Minn, 322, ( 17 N. W. | 1 | 1889–1889 |
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.