Muehlhauser v. Erickson
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SHUMAKER, Judge.
Appellants Brian Hartmann and Hart-mann Well Drilling and Service contend that the trial court erred in denying their motion for JNOV or, in the alternative, a new trial; in excluding eyewitness lay-opinion testimony; in improperly instructing the jury on damages; in refusing to give a curative instruction after final arguments; and in improperly awarding pre- verdict interest on future damages. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.
FACTS
As Sara Muehlhauser prepared to make a left turn at an intersection, respondent Kory Erickson’s sport utility vehicle…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Hibbing Education Ass'n v. Public Employment Relations BoardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
- Cornfeldt v. TongenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- State v. PostSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
- Lamb v. JordanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Halla Nursery, Inc. v. Baumann-Furrie & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2017
- Siewert v. Northern States Power Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2008
- Ptacek v. Earthsoils, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2014
- Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2017