Legal Opinion

Nickelson v. Mall of America Co.

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided June 8, 1999No. C5-98-2376PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

SCHUMACHER, Judge

Nickelson challenges the district court’s summary judgment dismissing her negligence claim against respondent Mall of America Company. Nickelson argues that Mall of America assumed a duty to protect its tenants’ employees by hiring a security force and by informing tenants that the security guards would intervene in ongoing physical altercations. Nickelson also argues that the tenant operational handbook and the mall safety and security handbook created a contractual duty to protect the tenants’ employees. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

FACTS

On December…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Cooper v. FrenchSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
  2. Iowa Kemper Insurance Co. v. StoneSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1978
  3. Cracraft v. City of St. Louis ParkSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
  4. State Ex Rel. Humphrey v. Philip Morris Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1996
  5. Germann v. F.L. Smithe MacHine Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1986

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. Lynne Stockberger, Both Personally and as the Representative of Maurice Stockberger, Deceased v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2003
  2. Funchess v. Cecil Newman Corp.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2000
  3. Alexander v. 1328 Uptown, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2020
  4. Funchess v. Cecil Newman Corp.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2000
  5. Stockberger, Lynne v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2003

1 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