Legal Opinion
Anderson v. Christopherson
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided August 8, 2011No. A11-191PublishedCited by 1 opinion
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HALBROOKS, Judge.
Appellant challenges the district court’s decision granting summary judgment to *834respondents and dismissing his claims alleging that respondents are liable pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 347.22. Because we conclude that the district court erred in its application of the statute, we reverse and remand for trial.
FACTS
On September 27, 2009, appellant Gordon Helmer Anderson was walking his small dog, Tuffy. When appellant and Tuffy walked in front of respondent Dennis Christopherson’s house, a dog named Bruno ran out, picked Tuffy up in his jaws, and would not let go. Appellant…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Cooper v. FrenchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
- Lubbers v. AndersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
- Lefto v. Hoggsbreath Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
- Seim Ex Rel. Seim v. GaravaliaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
- Lavalle Ex Rel. Lavalle v. KauppSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1953
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by1 opinion
- Anderson v. ChristophersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012