Legal Opinion
Kamrath v. Suburban National Bank
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided February 19, 1985No. C8-84-1308PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HUSPENI, Judge.
This is an appeal from a jury verdict determining that appellant Suburban National Bank (Suburban), through its agent Al Lyng, asked its employee, respondent Wanda Lind Kamrath (Kamrath), to take a polygraph test in violation of Minn.Stat. § 181.75 (1984). The jury found Kamrath was entitled to $60,000 in damages. The court determined Suburban should pay $30,000 in attorney’s fees, and denied its motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, new trial, or remittitur. We affirm.
FACTS
Kamrath was employed by Suburban as a teller. In December 1976, several deposits from…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Hubbard v. United Press International, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- State Ex Rel. Head v. PaulsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1971
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Village of IsleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1963
- City of Minnetonka v. CarlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- State by Spannaus v. Century Camera, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Niblo v. Parr Manufacturing, Inc.Supreme Court of Iowa · 1989
- Bohdan v. Alltool Mfg., Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
- Onyiah v. St. Cloud State UniversityDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 2009
- Myers v. Hearth Technologies, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
- Potter v. LaSalle Sports & Health ClubCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.