Legal Opinion · Dissent

Toetschinger v. Ihnot

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 27, 1977No. 44574Published

1DissentYetka, Justice

I respectfully dissent. In my opinion four alternative bases for reversal are present. The first is the trial court’s failure to instruct the jury that the likely presence of children is a factor to be considered in determining the standard of care. The second is the use of the emergency instruction. The third is that the evidence in this case is insufficient to allow a jury to find negligence on the part of the plaintiff. The fourth is the unnecessary continuation of the archaic rule followed in our state that a 5-year-old child can be held negligent in an auto-pedestrian accident.

A. The…

2Cases cited33 opinions

  1. Dwy v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1915
  2. Mathews v. MillsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1970
  3. Johnson v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
  4. Van Dyke v. First National BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
  5. Eckhardt v. HansonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1936

28 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