Legal Opinion

Engstrom v. Whitebirch, Inc.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 31, 2019No. A18-0366PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

GILDEA, Chief Justice.

This case requires that we interpret the private attorney general statute, Minn. Stat. § 8.31, subd. 3a (2018). This statute provides that "any person injured by a violation of" certain laws the attorney general is tasked with enforcing can bring that person's own civil action. Specifically, we are asked to decide whether appellant Daniel Engstrom's payments to an attorney to investigate what appellant contends were fraudulent demands constitute an "injury" under the statute. The district court and court of appeals dismissed appellant's claim, concluding that he had not…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Hoang Minh Ly v. NystromSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2000
  2. Laura L. Walsh v. U.S. Bank, N.A.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2014
  3. Dykes v. Sukup Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
  4. Zutz v. NelsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
  5. Weavewood, Inc. v. S & P Home Investments, LLCSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Doug Hoskin v. Josh KrsnakCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2024
  2. Knox v. Impact MHC Management, LLCDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2025
  3. Lakecia Gant, as trustee for the next-of-kin of Raven Bianca Gant v. Daniel Ledman, in his ...Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2024
  4. Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, Inc. v. Joint Revocable Trust Agreement of John N. Charais and ...Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2024

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

Powered by the Exa API