Legal Opinion
Prokop v. Independent School Dist. No. 625
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided August 19, 2008No. A07-1716PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
SCHELLHAS, Judge.
Appellants challenge a district court ruling that (1) respondent Independent School District # 625 is protected from suit by recreational-use immunity, (2) the trespasser-liability exception to recreational-use immunity does not apply, (3) the landowner had no duty, and (4) the risk of the activity was assumed. Because we conclude that recreational-use immunity applies, that the trespasser-liability exception does not apply, and that respondent had no duty to protect against an obviously dangerous condition, we affirm.
FACTS
Appellant Mark Prokop (Prokop) 1 was hit in…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Cooper v. FrenchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
- Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1996
- Wagner v. Thomas J. Obert EnterprisesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
- Baber v. DillSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
- Green-Glo Turf Farms, Inc. v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- James Ariola, as next of kin of, and trustee for, the Estate of Jack Ariola Erenberg, his son, and the Class of Beneficiaries, Pursuant to Minn. Stat. 573.02 v. The City of Stillwater, MinnesotaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2017
- Krieger v. City of St. PaulCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2009
- State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Mervel George Jones, III, AppellantCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2025