The case involved adult plaintiffs who alleged they were sexually abused as children by a priest in the Diocese of New Ulm between 1965 and 1975, and who brought an intentional-misrepresentation claim against the Diocese and parishes, asserting that the defendants failed to disclose prior reports of the priest's misconduct. The district court granted summary judgment for the defendants, and the court of appeals affirmed that ruling. The appellate court first held that the claim was not barred by the fraud statute of limitations because genuine issues of material fact existed regarding when the plaintiffs were on notice of potential fraud and whether they exercised reasonable diligence. On the merits, however, the court affirmed summary judgment because the claim rested solely on nondisclosure, and the plaintiffs had not established that the defendants had any legal or equitable duty to disclose the information. Without such a duty, the plaintiffs could not prove the essential element of a misrepresentation.
This case arose from the 2007 collapse of the Interstate 35W bridge in Minneapolis, where the state sought contractual contribution and indemnity plus statutory reimbursement from Jacobs Engineering Group Inc., the successor to the 1962 bridge designer Sverdrup, after compensating survivors under special legislation. Jacobs moved to dismiss the state's cross-claims, arguing they were barred by the statute of limitations in Minn. Stat. § 541.051, unconstitutionally impaired the original contract, were precluded by Pierringer settlements with other parties, and involved only voluntary payments. The district court denied the motion, and the court of appeals affirmed, holding that the claims were timely under the retroactive amendments to the statute, that the contract was not impaired because the state had long waived sovereign immunity in similar matters, that settlements did not bar the claims, and that the statutory reimbursement right applied regardless of whether payments were deemed voluntary.
This case arose from the 2007 collapse of the I-35W bridge, in which plaintiffs sued contractors URS and PCI for negligence after the structure failed during repairs; URS then filed third-party claims against Jacobs Engineering, the successor to the original bridge designer Sverdrup, seeking contribution and indemnity based on alleged design negligence. The district court denied Jacobs' motion to dismiss the third-party claims, but the court of appeals reversed and ordered dismissal. The court reasoned that Minnesota's statute of repose barred any liability by Jacobs to the plaintiffs at the time of collapse, eliminating the common liability required for a contribution claim. It further held that URS had not pleaded facts showing any relationship that would make it vicariously liable for Jacobs' conduct, which is necessary for an indemnity claim.
The case involved an appeal from a conviction for third-degree criminal sexual conduct after a bench trial in which the defense attorney failed to submit an agreed-upon written summation for final argument. The court reversed the conviction and remanded for a new trial, determining that the attorney's omission amounted to ineffective assistance constituting structural error. This was because the failure occurred without the client's knowledge or consent, deprived the defendant of advocacy at a critical trial stage, and lacked any plausible strategic basis, thereby undermining the reliability of the trial process.
This case concerns a common-law indemnity claim brought by Master Blaster, Inc., a South Dakota corporation, against Pipestone Plumbing & Heating, Inc., a Minnesota corporation, after a fire at a hog facility caused by allegedly defective flue-vent installation. Supreme Pork had sued Master Blaster in South Dakota for negligence and breach of implied warranty; Pipestone was dismissed from that suit for lack of personal jurisdiction but refused Master Blaster’s repeated tenders of defense. The Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment for Master Blaster, holding that proper vouching bound Pipestone to the South Dakota verdict because the tendered claims fell within Pipestone’s indemnity duty, no conflict of interest existed, Master Blaster adequately represented Pipestone’s interests, and due process was satisfied by notice and opportunity to participate. The court also upheld liability under Minnesota’s implied warranty of fitness for particular purpose, finding that the attic shields Pipestone fabricated and supplied qualified as goods.
The case involved Ann Staab's personal injury claim against Holy Cross Parish School after she fell from a wheelchair being pushed by her husband on school premises; the jury found the school and her husband each 50% at fault and awarded damages, but the district court required the school to pay 100% because the husband was not a party to the suit. The Court of Appeals reversed, holding that Minn. Stat. § 604.02, subd. 1 limits joint and several liability to tortfeasors whose fault exceeds 50%, so the school was responsible only for its 50% share. The court reasoned that the statute's reference to "persons" includes any tortfeasor whose fault was submitted to the jury, regardless of party status, and the plain language creates several liability as the default with narrow exceptions for greater fault or other specified circumstances. The decision applied to events after the 2003 statutory amendment that shifted toward several liability.