Legal Opinion
Johnson v. Peterson
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided June 26, 2007No. A06-1403PublishedCited by 20 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DIETZEN, Judge.
Appellant challenges the district court’s dismissal of his claims for negligent hiring, training, and supervision against respondents, the employer and supervisor of an employee who allegedly defrauded him. Because the district court properly applied the law, we affirm.
FACTS
Appellant Arnold Johnson is a vulnerable adult as defined by Minn.Stat. § 609.232 (2006). 1 Defendant Shannon Peterson was an insurance agent for respondent Bankers Life and Casualty Company (Bankers). Respondent Richard Groom was responsible for training and supervising Peterson.
In 2003, Johnson…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Ponticas v. K.M.S. InvestmentsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Northern States Power Co. v. FranklinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1963
- Marquette National Bank of Minneapolis v. NorrisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1978
- Bodah v. Lakeville Motor Express, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
- Piper Jaffray Companies, Inc. v. Nat. Union Fire Ins. Co.District Court, D. Minnesota · 1997
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by20 opinions
- Radcliffe v. Securian Financial Group, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2012
- Soto v. ShealeyDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2018
- Eischen v. Crystal Valley CooperativeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2013
- Anderson v. Benson Power, LLCDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2021
- Brown v. PfeifferDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2020
15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.