Legal Opinion
Hyatt v. Anoka Police Department
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided July 19, 2005No. A03-1707PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KLAPHAKE, Judge.
After she was bitten by a police dog during the arrest of her husband, respondent Lena M. Hyatt sued appellant City of Anoka and its police department under the “dog bite” statute, Minn.Stat. § 347.22 (2002). The city moved for summary judgment, arguing that (1) the dog bite statute does not apply to police dogs; (2) it is entitled to either statutory or vicarious official immunity; and (3) its police department should be dismissed because it is not a legal entity subject to suit. On appeal from the district court’s denial of the city’s motion, this court reversed,…
2Cases cited20 opinions
- Elwood v. County of RiceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Rico v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1991
- Pletan v. GainesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
- Jeffrey M. Kuha v. City of Minnetonka William Roth Kevin Anderson Dennis WaroshCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2004
- Johnson v. MorrisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Cannon v. Minneapolis Police DepartmentCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
- McClennon v. KipkeDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2011
- Medical Staff of Avera Marshall Regional Medical Center v. Avera MarshallCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2013
- Magnolia 8 Properties, LLC v. City of Maple PlainCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2017
- Brennan v. Minnesota Department of Human ServicesDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2023
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.