Legal Opinion
Zaretsky v. Molecular Biosystems, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided December 31, 1990No. C4-90-1136PublishedCited by 19 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DAVIES, Judge.
The issue raised on appeal is whether prejudgment interest was properly calculated under Minnesota (forum) law, even though New York law was followed in determining the substantive right of recovery. We affirm the use of forum law.
FACTS
The parties disputed the compensation to be paid David Zaretsky and Milton Cohen for their efforts to locate start-up financing for respondent Molecular Biosystems, Inc. The trial court determined the dispute was governed by New York substantive law. The parties exchanged written settlement offers and counteroffers prior to trial, but were…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Hanna v. PlumerSupreme Court of the United States · 1965
- Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Guaranty Trust Co. v. YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1945
- Laudenberger v. Port Auth. of AlleghenySupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
- Busik v. LevineSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1973
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by19 opinions
- Jill Nesladek, as Trustee for Heirs and Next of Kin of Jeremy J. Nesladek, Decedent v. Ford Motor CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1995
- Schwan's Sales Enterprises, Inc. v. Sig Pack, Inc., Doboy DivisionCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2007
- Harlan Feeders, Inc. v. Grand Laboratories, Inc.District Court, N.D. Iowa · 1995
- Florida State Board of Administration v. Law Engineering & Environmental Services, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2003
- Nesladek v. Ford Motor Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1994
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.