Warren v. Dinter
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Dissent
ANDERSON, Justice (dissenting).
At issue here is whether Dr. Richard Dinter owed Nurse Practitioner Sherry Simon's patient Susan Warren a duty of care. Because it was not reasonably foreseeable that Warren, who never met or talked to Dinter, would rely on Dinter's decision, reached in a single phone call between Dinter and Warren's actual treating professional, Simon, there is no legal duty here. I therefore respectfully dissent.
I
The precise factual scenario Dinter faced was not as simple as the court makes it appear. I briefly recount these facts because our duty inquiry "depends heavily on…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Palsgraf v. Long Island R.R. Co.New York Court of Appeals · 1928
- Togstad v. Vesely, Otto, Miller & KeefeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- Domagala v. RollandSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
- L & H AIRCO, INC. v. Rapistan Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- Connolly v. Nicollet HotelSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1959
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.