Supreme Court of Minnesota· 3/29/1974
Schmidt v. Smith
Citations
- 216 N.W.2d 669
- 299 Minn. 103
- 1974 Minn. LEXIS 1420
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- stating that releases are governed by the rules of con tract construction and, like any contract, require consideration, voluntariness, and contractual capacity
- upholding release that clearly intended to release claims arising from unknown injuries
- listing eight factors on release of a personal injury claim
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Edward D. Mulally
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
27 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Frey Ex Rel. Frey v. SnelgroveSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1978-08-18· cited 135×
- Bernstein v. KapneckCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1981-06-10· cited 77×
- Witt v. WatkinsAlaska Supreme Court· 1978-06-09· cited 41×
- Schmitt-Norton Ford, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co.D. Minnesota· 1981-10-21· cited 33×
- Sorensen v. Coast-To-Coast Stores (Central Organization), Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 1984-08-21· cited 29×
- PJ Acquisition Corp. v. SkoglundSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1990-03-09· cited 27×
- Goldberger v. Kaplan, Strangis & Kaplan, P.A.Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 1995-08-01· cited 22×
- Hamilton v. Independent School District No. 114Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 1984-09-25· cited 22×
- Karnes v. Quality Pork ProcessorsSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1995-06-09· cited 15×
- Myers v. Fecker Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1977-04-01· cited 11×
- Barilla v. ClapshawSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1976-01-02· cited 10×
- Jeffries v. GillitzerSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1975-01-03· cited 10×
- Convey Compliance Systems, Incorporated v. 1099 Pro, IncorporatedFourth Circuit· 2006-03-30· cited 6×
- Smothers v. Richland Memorial HospitalCourt of Appeals of South Carolina· 1997-10-20· cited 6×
- Gecy v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Amer.Supreme Court of South Carolina· 1979-07-25· cited 5×
- Spitzmueller v. Burlington Northern RailroadD. Minnesota· 1990-06-29· cited 5×
- Indiana Bell Telephone Co. v. MygrantIndiana Court of Appeals· 1982-10-25· cited 5×
- Cook v. ConnollyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota· 1984-11-08· cited 2×
- Somora v. Marriott Corp.D. Minnesota· 1993-02-08· cited 2×
- Bank of New York Mellon v. KeiranCourt of Appeals of Minnesota· 2015-04-06· cited 2×
Cites
14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Sauter Ex Rel. Benson v. SauterSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1955-05-06· cited 95×
- Denton v. UtleyMichigan Supreme Court· 1957-11-26· cited 81×
- Clancy v. PacentiAppellate Court of Illinois· 1957-12-05· cited 58×
- Dansby v. BuckArizona Supreme Court· 1962-07-06· cited 35×
- Richardson v. Chicago, Milwaukee & St. Paul Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1924-01-11· cited 35×
- Simons v. Schiek's, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1966-10-07· cited 27×
- Schoenfeld v. BukerSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1962-03-09· cited 26×
- Althoff v. TorrisonSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1918-04-05· cited 26×
- Nygard v. Minneapolis Street Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1920-10-29· cited 26×
- Newman v. FjelstadSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1965-07-09· cited 21×
- Whisler v. FindeisenSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1968-06-21· cited 17×
- Viskovich v. Walsh-Fuller-SlatteryNew York Court of Appeals· 1963-12-30· cited 13×
- Page v. MeansN.D. West Virginia· 1961-03-22· cited 6×
- Sundvall v. Interstate Iron Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1908-06-26· cited 3×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.