Legal Opinion

Morgan Co. v. Minnesota Mining & Manufacturing Co.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided September 17, 1976No. 46232PublishedCited by 29 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Yetka, Justice.

This is an appeal from a judgment of the district court granting defendant’s motion for partial summary judgment limiting its liability to $250. We affirm.

Plaintiff is a corporation engaged in the retail and wholesale jewelry business. In July of 1973 it entered into an agreement with defendant whereby defendant agreed to install and service a central station burglar alarm system at plaintiff’s place of business. In return, plaintiff agreed to pay defendant $605 upon completion of the installation and $82 a month thereafter.

The system was apparently connected by two wires to a…

2Cases cited16 opinions

  1. Better Food Markets, Inc. v. American District Telegraph Co.California Supreme Court · 1953
  2. Foont-Freedenfeld Corp. v. Electro-Protective Corp.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1973
  3. Crum v. Anchor Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1963
  4. Independent School District No. 877 v. Loberg Plumbing & Heating Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1963
  5. Foont-Freedenfeld Corp. v. Electro-Protective Corp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1974

11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by29 opinions

  1. Hague v. Allstate Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
  2. Smith County Education Ass'n v. AndersonTennessee Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Fretwell v. Protection Alarm Co.Supreme Court of Oklahoma · 1988
  4. Central Alarm of Tucson v. GanemCourt of Appeals of Arizona · 1977
  5. General Bargain Center v. American Alarm Co.Indiana Court of Appeals · 1982

24 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API