Rodenwald v. State Department of Natural Resources
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
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
- Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Spanel v. Mounds View School District No. 621Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1962
- Star Centers, Inc. v. Faegre & Benson, L.L.P.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
- Nieting v. BlondellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
- Henkes v. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1890
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.