Legal Opinion
St. Peter Herald v. City of St. Peter
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided March 3, 1992No. C9-91-1675PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
EDWARD D. MULALLY, Acting Judge.
The trial court declared that the notice of claim received by the City of St. Peter qualified as protected nonpublic or confidential data under Minn.Stat. § 13.39, subd. 2. The trial court also denied counsel's request to participate in an in camera review of the document. We agree and affirm.
FACTS
On June 24, 1991, the St. Peter City Council held a closed meeting as permitted by the attorney-client privilege exception to the Minnesota Open Meeting Law. See Minn.Stat. § 471.705, subd. 3 (1990). Appellants, the St. Peter Herald and the Free Press of…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State v. ParadeeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
- Erickson v. MacArthurSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
- Hirth v. Village of Long PrairieSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1966
- Naylor v. Minnesota DailySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
- State v. HopperstadCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- St. Peter Herald v. City of St. PeterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
- HTR Restaurants v. Erie Insurance, Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2023
- HTR Restaurants, Aplt. v. Erie InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2023
- Tambellini, J. v. Erie Insurance, Aplt.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2023
- Tambellini, J., Aplt. v. Erie InsuranceSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2023