Legal Opinion
Rehn v. Fischley
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided January 2, 1997No. C0-95-813PublishedCited by 45 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
TOMLJANOVICH, Justice.
Appellants, Dr. Barbara Fischley and the Greater Anoka County Animal Humane Society (“Humane Society”), seek review of the court of appeals’ reversal of the trial court’s directed verdict in favor of Dr. Fischley. Respondent Garry M. Rehn claimed he was injured after using formalin to disinfect cat cages at the Humane Society in January 1993. Rehn alleged that Dr. Fischley was negligent in: 1) recommending the use of formalin to the executive director of the Humane Society; 2) providing the formalin to the executive director of the Humane Society; and 3) in…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Elwood v. County of RiceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Rico v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1991
- Midland National Bank of Minneapolis v. PerranoskiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by45 opinions
- Gleason v. Metropolitan Council Transit OperationsCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1997
- J.E.B. v. DanksSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
- Sletten v. Ramsey CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
- In re the Welfare of J.R.B.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2011
- Mahoney & Hagberg v. NewgardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.