Legal Opinion · Dissent

Frankson v. Design Space International

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided February 19, 1986No. C5-85-708Published

1DissentWozniak, Judge

I respectfully dissent.

We are initially confronted with the bizarre result of the jury finding that Frank-son was employed at will, that there was no breach of his written employment contract, that he was not wrongfully terminated by DSI, and yet that he is entitled to $195,000 in general and punitive damages based solely on an internal termination letter which was shown only to those corporate employees within the chain of command who needed to know and without any evidence from Frankson of any damage.

1. The first element which a plaintiff must prove in a defamation action is that there was…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Stuempges v. Parke, Davis & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
  2. Prins v. Holland-North America Mortgage Co.Washington Supreme Court · 1919
  3. Hebner v. Great Northern Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1899
  4. Chalkley v. Atlantic Coast Line RailroadSupreme Court of Virginia · 1928
  5. McKenzie v. William J. Burns International Detective Agency, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1921

12 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