Legal Opinion

Newman v. Brendel & Zinn, Ltd.

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided January 18, 2005No. A04-1175Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

STONEBURNER, Judge.

Appellant Amanda R. Newman, who was a plaintiff . in a personal-injury action against a client of respondent Brendel & Zinn, Ltd. (law firm), alleges that law firm violated MinmStat. § 144.335, subd. 3a(a) (2002), by sharing her medical records obtained under Rule 35 of the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure with the physician retained by law firm to inspect the records and conduct a medical examination of appellant. The district court dismissed appellant’s complaint for failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted. Because we conclude that Rule 35…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Martens v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2000
  2. Bodah v. Lakeville Motor Express, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
  3. American Federation of State, County Municipal Employees, AFSCME Union Local 3456 v. Grand Rapids Public Utilities CommissionCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2002

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

Powered by the Exa API