Legal Opinion · Dissent

Mertz v. 999 QUEBEC, INC.

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided March 24, 2010No. 20090031Published

1DissentMaring, Justice

[¶ 27] I respectfully dissent from the majority opinion and would reverse the summary judgment and remand for further proceedings. I am of the opinion that the discovery rule applies to a survival cause of action and that there exists a genuine issue of material fact precluding summary judgment.

[¶ 28] The purpose of the discovery rule is “to balance the need for prompt assertion of claims against the policy favoring adjudication of claims on the merits and ensuring that a party with a valid claim will be given an opportunity to present it.” Wells v. First American Bank West, 1999 ND 170, ¶ 9,…

2Cases cited25 opinions

  1. United States v. KubrickSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
  2. Urie v. ThompsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1949
  3. Fine v. CheccioSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
  4. Anthony v. Koppers Co., Inc.Supreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1981
  5. Reading Co. v. KoonsSupreme Court of the United States · 1926

20 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