Legal Opinion

Muehlhauser v. Erickson

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided December 26, 2000No. CX-00-656PublishedCited by 4 opinions

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

  1. Hibbing Education Ass'n v. Public Employment Relations BoardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
  2. Cornfeldt v. TongenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
  3. State v. PostSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
  4. Lamb v. JordanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
  5. 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

  1. Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2017
  2. Siewert v. Northern States Power Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2008
  3. Ptacek v. Earthsoils, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2014
  4. Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2017

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

Powered by the Exa API