Kunnanz v. Edge

I concur in parts 2 and 3 of the majority opinion, and dissent from part 1.

Prior inconsistent pleadings from one proceeding are generally admissible as an admission in another. Enquip, Inc. v. Smith-McDonald Corp., 655 F.2d 115, 118 (7th Cir.1981); Mason v. Texaco, Inc., 129 F.R.D. 542, 543-44 (D.Kan.1989); Dreier v. Upjohn Co., 492 A.2d 164, 167 (Conn.1985). On appeal, the appellants do not dispute that the Minnesota pleadings were admissible.

While the pleadings are admissible, they are not conclusive and the party who made the admission may offer evidence to explain the admission. Enquip,…