Legal Opinion
Poepping v. Lindemann
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided April 10, 1964No. 39,143PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
Sheran, Justice.
Appeal from an order of the district court denying appellant’s motion for summary judgment and certifying the question of law as important and doubtful.
The Honorable Rol E. Barron states in his memorandum made a part of the order:
“The question presented is: May a surviving spouse maintain an action herself against the estate of a decedent spouse for his alleged negligence?
“It is settled that the Married Women’s Act, M. S. A. 519 et seq. does not authorize tort actions by one spouse against another. Karalis v. Karalis, 213 M. 31.
“This case raises nothing beyond previous…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Schubert v. August Schubert Wagon Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Chase v. New Haven Waste Material CorporationSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1930
- Johnson v. Peoples First National Bank & Trust Co.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1958
- Strom v. StromSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1906
- Shumway v. NelsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1961
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Mosier v. CarneyMichigan Supreme Court · 1965
- Estate of Pickens v. PickensIndiana Supreme Court · 1970
- Lyons v. LyonsOhio Supreme Court · 1965
- Wood v. MartinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Brinks v. Chesapeake & Ohio Railway Co.District Court, W.D. Michigan · 1969
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.