Legal Opinion

Hammerschmidt v. Moore

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided November 17, 1978No. 47758PublishedCited by 23 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KELLY, Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the district court granting a third-party defendant’s motion for. dismissal of a third-party complaint. The question for decision is whether the notice requirements of Minn.St. 340.951, which requires that writ*80ten notice be given the licensee of any licensed liquor establishment within 120 days after the injury, is a condition precedent to a third-party action for contribution. We hold that it is not and reverse the judgment of the district court.

This action arose out of a two-car collision which occurred in the early morning hours of March…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Pierringer v. HogerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1963
  2. Markey v. SkogNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1974
  3. White v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1965
  4. American Automobile Insurance v. MollingSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1953
  5. Gustafson v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1952

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

3Cited by23 opinions

  1. Calder v. City of CrystalSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  2. Wegan v. Village of LexingtonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
  3. Beaver v. PelettOregon Supreme Court · 1985
  4. Jones v. FisherSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
  5. Vesely, Otto, Miller & Keefe v. BlakeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981

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

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

Powered by the Exa API