Legal Opinion

Rowe v. St. Paul Ramsey Medical Center

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided September 11, 1990No. C1-90-610PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SCHUMACHER, Judge.

After resolving all other issues, the parties brought cross-motions for summary judgment, seeking an interpretation of Minn.Stat. § 466.04 limiting the liability of municipalities. The trial court .ruled for respondent Saint Paul Ramsey Medical Center (SPRMC) holding that the statute precludes both the claims of spouses of injured parties for loss of consortium and the claims of subrogating insurance companies for medical expenses. We reverse the former and affirm the latter, holding that appellant Bonnie Rowe is a separate claimant whose loss of consortium claim is…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Betlach v. Wayzata CondominiumSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
  2. Thill v. Modern Erecting Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1969
  3. Wilson v. City of EaganSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
  4. Regie De L'Assurance Automobile Du Quebec v. JensenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
  5. Huffer v. KozitzaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Rowe v. St. Paul Ramsey Medical CenterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1991
  2. Rowe v. St. Paul Ramsey Medical CenterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1991

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

Powered by the Exa API