Legal Opinion

Rodenwald v. State Department of Natural Resources

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided January 19, 2010No. A09-919Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

CRIPPEN, Judge. *

Appellants Charles and Gayle Roden-wald challenge the district court’s grant of summary judgment in favor of respondent State of Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR), arguing that the mere-slipperiness rule does not apply to their claim that state employees were negligent. Because the rationale requiring the rule applies equally to claims stated against municipal and state entities, and because we find no merit in appellants’ other contentions, we affirm.

FACTS

On March 15, 2007, Charles Rodenwald was on the job for Auto Glass Specialists, a company hired by…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
  2. Spanel v. Mounds View School District No. 621Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1962
  3. Star Centers, Inc. v. Faegre & Benson, L.L.P.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
  4. Nieting v. BlondellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
  5. Henkes v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890

5 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