Legal Opinion
CPJ Enterprises, Inc. v. Gernander
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided September 13, 1994No. C8-94-547PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PETERSON, Judge.
On appeal from a summary judgment, appellant CPJ Enterprises, Inc. argues the district court erred in concluding that an undisclosed principal cannot sue its agent’s attorney for malpractice and that an agent who suffered no damages could not sue its attorney for malpractice to recover damages suffered by its undisclosed principal. We affirm.
FACTS
In 1988, EMD Construction Company (EMD) signed a real estate exchange agreement with appellant CPJ Enterprises, Inc. (CPJ). Both companies were closely-held corporations owned by different members of the same family. In 1985,…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Offerdahl v. University of Minnesota Hospitals & ClinicsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Wartnick v. Moss & BarnettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
- McEvoy v. HeliksonOregon Supreme Court · 1977
- M.H. v. Caritas Family ServicesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
- L & H AIRCO, INC. v. Rapistan Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Bremer Business Finance Corp. v. Dorsey & Whitney LLP (In Re SRC Holding Corp.)United States Bankruptcy Court, D. Minnesota · 2006
- Bremer Business Finance Corp. v. Whitney (In Re SRC Holding Corp.)District Court, D. Minnesota · 2007