Park Construction Co. v. Independent School District No. 32
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Dissent
I agree with the dissent written by Mr. Justice Peterson. I do not believe that the doctrine of Holdridge v. Stowell,39 Minn. 360, 40 N.W. 259, is bad law or that it should be discarded; nor do I feel that such cases as Gasser v. Sun Fire Office, 42 Minn. 315, 44 N.W. 252; Whitney v. National Masonic Ace. Assn. 52 Minn. 378, 54 N.W. 184; Aaberg v. Minnesota Com'l Men's Assn. 152 Minn. 478,189 N.W. 434; Abramowitz v. Continental Ins. Co. 170 Minn. 215,212 N.W. 449; and Glidden Co. v. Retail Hardware Mut. F. Ins. Co. 181 Minn. 518, 233 N.W. 310, 77 A.L.R. 616, should be overruled, particularly…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Gasser v. Sun Fire OfficeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
- Whitney v. National Masonic Accident Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1893
- Glidden Co. v. Retail Hardware Mutual Fire InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1930
- Holdridge v. StowellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1888
- Abramowitz v. Continental InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1927
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.