Legal Opinion
Engvall v. Soo Line Railroad
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided February 17, 2000No. C6-99-64PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PAUL H. ANDERSON, Justice.
Appellant Soo Line Railroad Company challenges the Minnesota Court of Appeals’ dismissal of its appeal from a final judgment of the Hennepin County District Court. Before entering final judgment, the district court had granted respondent General Motors Corporation’s (GM) motion for summary judgment on the grounds of federal preemption. The court of appeals characterized the grant of summary judgment as an immediately appeal-able interlocutory judgment that was based on a lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The court of appeals then held Soo Line’s appeal…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Cohen v. Beneficial Industrial Loan Corp.Supreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Mitchell v. ForsythSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Urie v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
- Connie JAMISON, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Jerry WILEY, Defendant-Appellant, United States of America, Defendant-AppelleeCourt of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit · 1994
- Hunt v. Nevada State BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1969
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- State v. DahlinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2008
- T.A. Schifsky & Sons, Inc. v. Bahr Construction, LLCSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2009
- Engvall v. Soo Line Railroad Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
- Kastner v. Star Trails Ass'nSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
- Janssen v. Best & Flanagan, LLPSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2005
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.