Legal Opinion
Pomije v. Scheiber
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided July 23, 1985No. C4-84-1841PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HUSPENI, Judge.
Appellants, Donald G. and Helen M. Po-mije, appeal from the order denying their motion for a new trial. They assert that the jury verdict in their action for damages and loss of consortium was the result of passion and prejudice, that the damages are inadequate, and that the trial court improperly instructed the jury. We affirm.
FACTS
On February 17, 1978, a vehicle driven by Donald Pomije and a vehicle driven by respondent, Leo Scheiber, collided at an intersection. Scheiber admitted liability for the accident. The only issue at trial was the nature and extent of damages.
A…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Krueger v. KnutsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1961
- LaValle v. Aqualand Pool Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- DeWitt v. SchuhbauerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1970
- Clifford v. PetersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1967
- Tuominen v. WaldholmSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Northway v. MadsenCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
- Warner v. LawrenceDistrict Court, Virgin Islands · 1991
- Law v. Essick Manufacturing Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
- Kath v. Burlington Northern RailroadCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1989