Legal Opinion

Oslund v. Johnson

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided August 12, 1997No. C4-97-253Published

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HUSPENI, Judge.

Respondents, two liquor licensees, were granted summary judgment on the ground that appellant, a vicariously liable tortfeasor, had notice of the victim’s claim against appellant more than 60 days before appellant notified respondents of his claims against them, thereby violating the Minn.Stat. § 340A.802 notice requirement for bringing an action against liquor licensees. Because we conclude that section 340A.802 does not apply to those in appellant’s situation and that in any event appellant did not receive notice of the claim against him more than 60 days before…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. Hibbing Education Ass'n v. Public Employment Relations BoardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
  2. In Re HaggertySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
  3. Wallace v. Commissioner of TaxationSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1971
  4. Wegan v. Village of LexingtonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
  5. Wallin v. LetourneauSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995

7 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