Wick Building Systems, Inc. v. Employers Insurance of Wausau
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
DAVIES, Judge.
Appellant attorneys challenge the district court’s ruling that they are not entitled to compensation under Minn. R. Civ. P. 45.06 for their time and expense in preparing for and giving testimony to produce documents in response to subpoenas duces tecum. We reverse.
FACTS
Appellants Lloyd Grooms and Donald Brown are attorneys. They represented Wick Building Systems, Inc. (Wick), in settlement negotiations on an insurance claim against respondent Employers Insurance of Wausau (Wausau). Wick claims that the parties had nearly reached a settlement on the claim when the…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Frost-Benco Electric Ass'n v. Minnesota Public Utilities CommissionSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
- Schumann v. Northtown Insurance Agency, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1990
- Bowman v. BowmanCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992
- Howard v. City of St. Louis ParkCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1991
3Cited by3 opinions
- Lake Superior Center Authority v. Hammel, Green & Abrahamson, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2006
- Leek v. American Express Property CasualtyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999
- Karsian v. Inter-Regional Financial Group, Inc.District Court, D. Colorado · 1998