Julius J. Olson

The case involved plaintiffs suing the City of St. Paul after Ellen Hansen was attacked and injured by two known vicious dogs on a public sidewalk; the city had received multiple prior reports of the dogs' attacks, had notified the owner they were subject to impoundment or destruction under local ordinances, and had investigated a recent attack just hours earlier but failed to act before the lunch break when Hansen was bitten. The trial court granted summary judgment to the city, holding it immune under the discretionary function exception in Minn. St. 466.03, subd. 6. The Minnesota Supreme Court reversed, ruling that the city's inaction on a known dangerous condition did not qualify as a protected discretionary act and that municipal liability for unsafe sidewalks extends to this moving hazard under common-law duty to maintain reasonably safe streets and sidewalks.

torts & liability

The case involved seven taxpayers suing Swift County officials to block the construction of a hospital jointly with the city of Benson and the issuance of up to $200,000 in county bonds to help fund it. The plaintiffs challenged the county's statutory authority to act jointly, the form and timing of the ballot propositions submitted to voters at the 1946 general election, the lack of a prior intergovernmental agreement, and whether the bond issue would exceed the county's debt limit. The trial court sustained the defendants' demurrer, and the Minnesota Supreme Court affirmed, holding that state statutes authorized joint hospital projects and bond financing, the election questions were properly presented and approved by voters, no pre-election agreement was required, and the debt-limit claim was unsupported because certain obligations could be excluded. The court concluded that the county possessed the necessary powers and had followed the statutory procedures.

electionstaxeshealthcare

The case was a wrongful death action under Minnesota's death-by-wrongful-act statute, brought by the administrator of Edward Kordiak's estate against the driver Harry Holmgren and related defendants after Kordiak, a passenger, died in a rollover accident caused when the car was forced off the road during an attempt to pass another vehicle. The jury returned a verdict for the defendants, and the trial court denied a new trial. The supreme court reversed and ordered a new trial, holding that the trial court's jury instruction on contributory negligence was erroneous because the evidence showed no intoxication by the driver, that Kordiak had joined in requesting that the driver slow down, and that Kordiak's conduct did not proximately contribute to the accident.

torts & liability

This case arose from a divorce decree incorporating an agreement giving the plaintiff ex-wife a lien on her former husband's corporate stock for half the dividends and sale proceeds, but the stock certificates had already been pledged to creditors (including the company) as security for the husband's debts. After the company obtained a judgment against the husband and the sheriff sold the stock at execution to the company as purchaser, the plaintiff sued the sheriff for conversion, claiming half the sale proceeds. The Minnesota Supreme Court affirmed the trial court's decision for the defendants, holding that the company's rights as pledgee were not waived by the judgment and purchase at sale because the pledges predated the divorce agreement (making plaintiff's interest subordinate) and there was no actual or implied intent to waive the security interest. The court noted that the appeal properly reached only the denial of a new trial, as an order denying amended findings is non-appealable, and the facts showed the pledge remained effective until the debt was satisfied.

family lawpropertyprocedure

The case was a negligence suit brought by a spectator injured by a flying hockey puck at a city-owned arena leased for games, where the plaintiff had won a $2,000 jury verdict. The trial court granted the defendant's motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, and the appellate court affirmed that order. The court held that the plaintiff assumed the risk of injury because hockey risks, like those in baseball, were matters of common knowledge in the region, the arena's setup with side walls but no side nets was standard, and the defendant had no duty to screen all seats or prove additional precautions.

torts & liability

This case involved a dispute between a contractor, Willner, and Wallinder Sash & Door Co. over the construction of an addition to the company's manufacturing plant under a cost-plus contract, along with a counterclaim for damages after a fire destroyed the plant. Willner sought to foreclose a mechanic's lien, while the company claimed Willner negligently caused and failed to contain the fire; the parties agreed to submit specific negligence questions to a jury while reserving issues of contractor status and proximate cause for the court. The jury found Willner negligent in starting the fire but not its spread, and the company negligent in the spread, but the trial court set aside portions of the verdicts, determined Willner was an independent contractor whose negligence proximately caused the loss, and awarded the company $64,500 on its counterclaim. The Minnesota Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, holding that the evidence supported the findings on negligence, proximate cause, and independent-contractor status, and that the company's operations did not constitute an intervening cause.

torts & liabilitypropertybusiness & regulatory