Boubelik v. Liberty State Bank
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1DissentGardebring, Justice
Today, the majority strips away protection ■for banking consumers that has long been afforded by both the legislature and the courts. To do so, the majority invades the province of the jury and ignores clearly expressed legislative intent. I disagree.
Initially I part company with the majority on its interpretation of the standard for determining when a bank must disclose the fraudulent activity of one of its customers to another of its customers. The majority has, I believe, misinterpreted our prior holdings on this subject and, in so doing, has overruled portions of them sub silentio.
As the…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Fayerweather v. RitchSupreme Court of the United States · 1904
- Klein v. First Edina National BankSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1972
- Richfield Bank & Trust Co. v. SjogrenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
- Jenson v. Touche Ross & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Vikse v. FlabySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.