Rice v. Perl
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OTIS, Justice.
This is an appeal by plaintiff Cecelia Rice, and a request for review by defendants Norman Perl and the law firm of DeParcq, Anderson, Perl, Hunegs and Rud-quist, (hereinafter “the Perl defendants”), resulting from findings that defendants breached their fiduciary duty to Rice, their client, by failing to disclose their ongoing relationship with defendant Willard Browne, a claims adjuster employed by defendant Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.
The Perl firm was paying Browne during the time he was representing Aetna in negotiations with the Perl firm to settle Rice’s claim against…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Baker v. HumphreySupreme Court of the United States · 1880
- In Re Estate of LeeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
- Anderson v. AndersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1972
- Scheele v. Union Loan & Finance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1937
- Vosbeck v. LerdallSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1955
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by73 opinions
- Burrow v. ArceTexas Supreme Court · 1999
- Maritrans GP Inc. v. Pepper, Hamilton & ScheetzSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1992
- Star Centers, Inc. v. Faegre & Benson, L.L.P.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
- Arce v. Burrow, Texas Court of Appeals, 14th District (Houston)1998
- Perl v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
68 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.