Legal Opinion
State Ex Rel. Hatch v. Employers Insurance of Wausau
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided May 21, 2002No. C5-01-1904PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
PORITSKY, Judge. *
The state appeals from the district court’s grant of respondents’ motion for summary judgment. The district court ruled that the state’s claims are time-barred by the statute of limitations provision of the Minnesota Environmental Response and Liability Act (MERLA). On appeal, respondents filed notices of review, asking this court to review a prior district court order denying their motions for summary judgment on numerous constitutional grounds. Additionally, respondent Home Insurance Co. (Home) challenges an order denying its motion for partial summary judgment…
2Cases cited38 opinions
- Matsushita Electric Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Zenith Radio CorporationSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Pike v. Bruce Church, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Energy Reserves Group, Inc. v. Kansas Power & Light Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Arco Environmental Remediation, L.L.C. v. Department Of Health And Environmental Quality Of The State Of MontanaCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 2000
- Brown-Forman Distillers Corp. v. New York State Liquor AuthoritySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
33 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Minnesota Ex Rel. Northern Pacific Center, Inc. v. BNSF Railway Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2012
- Lamere v. St. Jude Medical, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2013
- Hoffman v. Northern States Power Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2008
- In Re the Estate of EckleyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
- In re the Estate of RuttCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2012
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.