Legal Opinion

Great Northern Insurance Co. v. Honeywell International, Inc.

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided April 10, 2017No. A16-0997PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

Kirk, Judge

Appellant-insurer challenges the summary-judgment dismissal of its product-liability, breach-of-warranty, and post-sale duty-to-warn claims against respondent-manufacturer, arguing that the district court erred by concluding that its claims were barred by the ten-year statute of repose because the heat-recovery ventilator (HRV) is not “equipment or machinery’ installed upon real property under Minn. Stat. § 541.051, subd. 1(e) (2016), the exception to the statute of repose. Because the HRV satisfies the plain and ordinary meaning of “equipment or machinery” under subdivision…

2Cases cited22 opinions

  1. Fabio v. BellomoSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
  2. Amaral v. Saint Cloud HospitalSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
  3. Hodder v. Goodyear Tire & Rubber Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
  4. Staab v. Diocese of St. CloudSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
  5. Germann v. F.L. Smithe MacHine Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1986

17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Great N. Ins. Co. v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2018
  2. Thompson v. Brasscraft Manufacturing CompanyDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2021

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API