Legal Opinion

Krutsch v. Walter H. Collin GmBh Verfahrenstechnik Und Maschinenfabric

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided January 26, 1993No. CX-92-786, C3-92-1472, C7-92-2141PublishedCited by 7 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HUSPENI, Judge.

Respondent was injured while attempting to repair a machine manufactured by appellant. Respondent sued appellant, alleging defective design and failure to warn. The jury apportioned negligence as follows: 16.67% to respondent; 16.67% to appellant; and 66.67% to respondent’s employer. Appellant claims the trial court erred (1) in denying its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or, in the alternative, new trial; (2) in not striking the jury’s award for future medical expenses; (3) in not applying the collateral source statute; and (4) in denying appellant’s…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
  2. Hauenstein v. Loctite Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
  3. Lamb v. JordanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
  4. Ralph M. Johnson v. Niagara MacHine & Tool Works, a New York CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1981
  5. Folstad v. EderSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1991

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by7 opinions

  1. Ford Motor Co. v. WoodCourt of Special Appeals of Maryland · 1998
  2. Myers v. Hearth Technologies, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
  3. Anderson v. Independent School DistrictCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2004
  4. Duane Dewey Anderson v. Ind. School Dist. 97Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2003
  5. Duane Dewey Anderson v. Ind. School Dist. 97Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2004

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API