Legal Opinion
Gieseke v. IDCA, Inc.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided March 26, 2014No. A12-0713PublishedCited by 65 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DIETZEN, Justice.
The primary question before us is whether Minnesota should formally recognize a cause of action for tortious interference with prospective economic advantage. John Gieseke, on behalf of Diversified Water Diversion, Inc. (Diversified), brought an action against appellants IDCA, Inc., et al. (IDCA), asserting, among other claims, tortious interference with Diversified’s prospective economic advantage. Following trial, an advisory jury found, among other things, that IDCA had tor-tiously interfered with Diversified’s prospective economic advantage and that Diversified…
2Cases cited64 opinions
- Korea Supply Co. v. Lockheed Martin Corp.California Supreme Court · 2003
- Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. SturgesTexas Supreme Court · 2001
- Trau-Med of America, Inc. v. Allstate Insurance Co.Tennessee Supreme Court · 2002
- Carvel Corp. v. NoonanNew York Court of Appeals · 2004
- Dowd & Dowd, Ltd. v. GleasonIllinois Supreme Court · 1998
59 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by65 opinions
- Bruce Munro v. Lucy Activewear, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2018
- Cpi Card Grp., Inc. v. John Dwyer, Multi Packaging Solutions, Inc.District Court, D. Maine · 2017
- Paisley Park Enters., Inc. v. BoxillDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2019
- Infogroup, Inc. v. DatabaseLLCDistrict Court, D. Nebraska · 2015
- C.H. Robinson Worldwide, Inc. v. Traffic Tech, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2023
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.