Nemanic v. Gopher Heating & Sheet Metal, Inc.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
WAHL, Justice.
This appeal raises the question of whether, in a personal injury action arising out of an automobile collision, when plaintiff introduces expert testimony to support the tort threshold required by Minn.Stat. § 65B.51, subd. 3 (1982) and the element of causation, and defendants do not produce an adverse medical witness, a directed verdict for plaintiff on these elements automatically results.
Plaintiff Lance Nemanic received a $65,-000 judgment from a jury verdict for injuries sustained in an automobile collision with defendant Warren P. Kelley in August 1979. Defendants admitted…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- Boutang v. Twin City Motor Bus Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1956
- Krueger v. KnutsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1961
- Hanson v. Homeland Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1951
- Walton v. JonesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
- Sullivan v. F. D. Chapman Construction Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by23 opinions
- Baber v. DillSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
- ZumBerge v. Northern States Power Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992
- Willmar Poultry Co. v. Carus Chemical Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
- Boone v. MartinezSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- Pedersen v. United Services Automobile Ass'nCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.