Legal Opinion

Hosley v. Armstrong Cork Co.

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided May 31, 1985No. C6-84-1209PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FOLEY, Judge.

The only non-settling defendant in a mul-ti-defendant products liability case appeals from an order denying its motion for new trial. A judgment required it to pay a portion of the damages attributed by the *815jury to a bankrupt defendant severed from the case. Appellant contends that the plaintiffs settlement with some defendants through Pierringer releases destroyed joint liability between the defendants. Alternatively, defendant argues that if it is liable it is entitled to statutory reallocation or common law contribution against the settling defendants, which the…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Frey Ex Rel. Frey v. SnelgroveSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1978
  2. Bartels v. City of WillistonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1979
  3. Jack Frost, Inc. v. Engineered Building Components Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
  4. Transport Leasing Corporation v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1972
  5. Hart v. Cessna Aircraft Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1979

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. Hosley v. Armstrong Cork Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
  2. Hoerr v. Northfield Foundry and MacH. Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1985
  3. Erickson v. Hinckley Municipal Liquor StoreCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
  4. Hosley v. Pittsburgh Corning Corp.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
  5. Hoerr v. Northfield Foundry and MacH. Co.North Dakota Supreme Court · 1985

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

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

Powered by the Exa API