Legal Opinion

Miernicki v. Duluth Curling Club

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided July 5, 2005No. A04-1741PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HUDSON, Judge.

The complaint in this dram-shop action against respondents was filed without the knowledge of appellants, the plaintiffs, by an attorney whom they had not retained. Respondents moved for summary judgment on the ground that the statute of limitations had expired before appellants ratified the attorney’s action in filing the complaint. The motion was denied, and the matter proceeded to trial. A jury awarded appellants collectively $20,000. Appellants challenge the award, and respondents challenge the denial of summary judgment. We do not address the merits of appellants’…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Federal Election Commission v. NRA Political Victory FundSupreme Court of the United States · 1994
  2. Davies v. West Publishing Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
  3. Kemp v. Allis-Chalmers Corp.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1986
  4. Town of Nasewaupee v. City of Sturgeon BayWisconsin Supreme Court · 1977
  5. Entzion v. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Mercer v. AndersenCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2006

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

Powered by the Exa API