Legal Opinion
Soucek v. Banham
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided July 13, 1993No. C2-92-2466PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
RANDALL, Judge.
Appellants are three police officers of the Minneapolis Police Department, Donald Banham, Jr., Dennis Hamilton, and Kim Hedberg, (officers) and the City of Minne*156apolis (city). Respondent Jon Soucek commenced this action against appellants after the officers shot and killed respondent’s dog. Respondent’s dog was a German Shepherd named “Mack.” The officers claim they believed the animal was a wolf. In his complaint, respondent alleges negligence per se, intentional and/or negligent infliction of emotional distress, and negligent supervision. Appellants moved for summary…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- Frost-Benco Electric Ass'n v. Minnesota Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
- Hubbard v. United Press International, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Offerdahl v. University of Minnesota Hospitals & ClinicsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Rico v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1991
- Pletan v. GainesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- McDougall v. LammSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2012
- Costilla v. StateCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1997
- Leiendecker v. Asian Women United of MinnesotaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2013
- Bolton v. DEPT. OF HUMAN SERVICES, STATECourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1995
- Neppl v. Signature Flight Support Corp.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2002
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.