Legal Opinion
Sigurdson v. Isanti County
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided November 17, 1989No. C2-88-1460PublishedCited by 50 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SIMONETT, Justice.
This case asks whether defendants’ gender discrimination was a continuing violation so that the time for filing a complaint was extended beyond the prescribed statute of limitations. We agree with the court of appeals that the doctrine of law of the case does not preclude consideration of this issue and that the discrimination was a continuing violation. We affirm.
This is the third appeal in this protracted litigation. We pick up our story at Sigurd-son II, the second appeal.1 There the court *64of appeals reversed the trial court in part, ruling that one of plaintiffs several…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Delaware State College v. RicksSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- United Air Lines, Inc. v. EvansSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Bazemore v. FridaySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Hubbard v. United Press International, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Lorance v. At&t Technologies, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1989
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by50 opinions
- Christine Treanor v. MCI Telecommunications CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2000
- Brantley Ex Rel. Brantley v. Independent School District No. 625District Court, D. Minnesota · 1996
- Taxi Connection v. Dakota, Minnesota & Eastern RailroadCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2008
- Turner v. IDS Financial Services, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1991
- Giuliani v. Stuart Corp.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1994
45 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.