Legal Opinion

Stenzel v. Bach

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 26, 1973No. 43186PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Harold W. Schultz, Justice. *

This action arises as the result of personal injuries sustained by plaintiff Bruce Stenzel (hereafter plaintiff) while riding as a passenger in an automobile owned by Francis J. Bach and driven by his 18-year-old son, Francis J. Bach, Jr., both named as defendants herein. The trial court found, as a matter of law, that plaintiff was not negligent. Defendants appeal from the denial of their alternative motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict or a new trial.

At the time of the accident, the 17-year-old plaintiff was seated in the right rear seat of the car…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Springrose v. WillmoreSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1971
  2. Lovejoy v. Minneapolis-Moline Power Implement Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1956
  3. Ahlstrom v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
  4. Nees v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1944
  5. Hubenette v. OstbySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Hill v. Okay Const. Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
  2. Busch v. Busch Construction, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
  3. Advanced Training Systems Inc. v. Caswell Equipment Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
  4. Frey v. Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
  5. Johnson v. SerraCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1975

18 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