Wagner v. Thomas J. Obert Enterprises
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1DissentHuspeni, Judge
I respectfully dissent and would affirm the jury verdict and the trial court eviden-tiary rulings.
Primary Assumption of Risk
I believe a jury instruction on primary assumption of risk was appropriate under the facts of this case.
The doctrine of primary assumption of risk is a viable one, and in many cases is a matter for the trial court to resolve. See, e.g., Swagger v. City of Crystal, 379 N.W.2d 183 (Minn.Ct.App.1985), pet. for rev. denied, (Minn. Feb. 19, 1986) (this court affirmed the trial court’s judgment notwithstanding the verdict against the plaintiff on the basis of primary…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Springrose v. WillmoreSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1971
- Jenson v. Touche Ross & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Cameron v. EvansSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
- Brown v. St. Paul City Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
- Lindstrom v. Yellow Taxi Company of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.