Legal Opinion
Giuliani v. Stuart Corp.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided March 1, 1994No. C3-93-1479PublishedCited by 30 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PARKER, Judge.
In this sexual harassment action brought under the Minnesota Human Rights Act, Minn.Stat. §§ 363.01-.15 (1990), Stuart Corporation appeals from a judgment for plaintiff Cheryl Giuliani, alleging that her claims were barred, forfeited, or waived; that the trial court’s findings were clearly erroneous; and that the award of attorney fees was excessive. Stuart Corp. also challenges the civil penalty awarded the State of Minnesota. We affirm.
FACTS
Cheryl Giuliani managed an apartment complex for Stuart Corporation, a real estate management firm owned and operated by Stuart…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Harris v. Forklift Systems, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Meritor Savings Bank, FSB v. VinsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Hubbard v. United Press International, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Sigurdson v. Isanti CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by30 opinions
- Christine Treanor v. MCI Telecommunications CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2000
- Robert Mems Nathanial Khaliq Phillip Webb Thurman Smith Byron Brown v. City of St. Paul, Department of Fire and Safety ServicesCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2003
- Davies v. West Publishing Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
- Lori A. TODD, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. ORTHO BIOTECH, INC., Defendant-AppellantCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1998
- Mandy v. Minnesota Mining & ManufacturingDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1996
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.