Legal Opinion
Hyland v. State
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided December 14, 1993No. C9-93-1017PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KLAPHAKE, Judge.
Appellants Ronald Hyland and Gail Hy-land (the Hylands) challenge summary judgment dismissing their claims of defamation, tortious interference with business relations, and violation of the Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act against the Minnesota Department of Transportation and its employees (MnDOT), because the MnDOT employees were protected by absolute immunity and official immunity. We affirm.
FACTS
The Hylands have owned and operated a passenger transportation business in St. Paul since 1988. Under the motor carrier statute, all carriers of passengers for hire…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Imbler v. PachtmanSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Frost-Benco Electric Ass'n v. Minnesota Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
- Elwood v. County of RiceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Hubred v. Control Data Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- Rico v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1991
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Stresemann v. JessonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
- Marcia Lee Stresemann, d/b/a Affiliated Counseling Center, LLC v. Lucinda Jesson, Commissioner of the Minnesota Department of Human Services, in her individual and official capacitySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2015