Legal Opinion

Tuckner v. Chouinard

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided June 16, 1987No. C0-86-1923PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

RANDALL, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order denying appellant’s motion for a new trial or a judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV). Appellant Frederick Tuckner brought an action against Daniel Choui-nard for injuries sustained in an automobile accident. The jury returned a verdict finding that appellant had sustained injury, but that he had suffered no loss in earnings and that respondent was not negligent. We affirm.

FACTS

Shortly after 12:30 a.m. on November 5, 1983, appellant Tuckner picked up respondent Chouinard, his girlfriend’s son, 1 to go deer hunting up north. After…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Seidl v. Trollhaugen, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
  2. Sandhofer v. Abbott-Northwestern HospitalSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
  3. Rieger v. ZackoskiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  4. Hestad v. Pennsylvania Life Insurance CompanySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1973
  5. Schubitzke v. Minneapolis, St. Paul & Sault Ste. Marie RailroadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Marshall v. GalvezCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992

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

Powered by the Exa API