Minnesota Appellate Attorneys / Lawyers
Appellate Law Videos Available - Click to Collapse 
Appellate Law: Reported Decisions
James S. Ballentine
James S. Ballentine Reported Decisions
Case Name:
White v. White, 676 N.W.2d 692 (Minn. App. 2004)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: Because there was only one person operating a vehicle, in this case the vehicle's owner, the Safety Responsibility Act did not apply and the court properly granted the owner and a back seat passenger summary judgment in a negligence action.
Case Name:
Cameron v. Manners, C2-01-1908 (Minn. App. 2002)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: A court erred by granting stepfather's motion for summary judgment in stepdaughter's personal injury suit, where she was injured by a fence erected while she was in the house, and the stepfather should have known she might not have noticed it.
Case Name:
Hancock v. Independent School Dist. No. 281, C0-02-718 ( Minn. App. 2002)
Court: SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA
Overview: The trial court properly denied the school district's summary judgment motion as the school district failed to provide evidence that the school district engaged in planning-level conduct protected by statutory immunity.
Case Name:
Loven v. City of Minneapolis, 626 N.W.2d 198 (Minn. 2001)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: In an action brought by accident victims seeking basic economic loss benefits from city, trial court erred in holding that municipal tort liability cap applied to recovery of no-fault benefits from city.
Case Name:
Lieske v. Farm Bureau Mut. Ins. Co., C9-00-616 (Minn. App. 2000)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: Court properly assessed 15% interest from arbitration until judgment date, but erred by awarding 15% postjudgment interest instead of 5%. Postjudgment interest calculated from judgment since amended order did not substantively affect interest award.
Case Name:
Racine v. Amco Ins. Co., 605 N.W.2d 773 (Minn. App. 2000)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: The court reversed denial of appellant's motion to vacate arbitration award since arbitrator exceeded his authority by finding economic consumption by decedent irrelevant when determining dependency under no-fault statute.
Case Name:
Anderson v. Independent Sch. Dist. No. 891, C2-98-1556, C4-98-1557 (Minn. App. 1999)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: School district was immune from negligence action brought by minor who was injured while playing basketball on school district property because the school district had recreational immunity.
Case Name:
Giacomino v. Tri-State Ins. Co., 595 N.W.2d 530 (Minn. App. 1999)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: Insurance company was entitled to assert its subrogation interests, because company fully compensated insured for the total loss of his vehicle based on the vehicle's market value; market value was the correct standard where it was ascertainable.
Case Name:
Mattila v. American Family Mut. Ins. Co., C0-97-1982 (Minn. App. 1998)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: A UIM insurer was not bound by its insured's high/low arbitration agreement and award with defendants in an underlying negligence action because the agreement was ambiguous as to whether it was intended to bar the insured's UIM claim.
Case Name:
Golden v. Watson, C5-96-1840 (Minn. App. 1997)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: A client was not entitled to vacate a judgment against an attorney in the client's action for negligence because the client was not able to prove that he had a reasonable claim for a change in the amount of damages awarded in the judgment.
Case Name:
Palodichuk v. Lesher, C7-96-2603 (Minn. App. 1997)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: The dismissal with prejudice of appellant's negligence complaint against the driver was affirmed because the complaint did not identify the driver as the owner of the car and did not allege any negligence imputed to the driver.
Case Name:
Schoffman by Schoffman v. Blue Cross & Blue Shield, 557 N.W.2d 625 (Minn. App. 1997)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: Summary judgment for a health insurer was proper where the insureds failed to give timely notice of a claim for medical benefits and failed to notify it of their third party suit, thus prejudicing the insurer's subrogation rights.
Case Name:
Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Makhloufi, C8-96-1539 ( Minn. App. 1996)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: Trial court properly decided that insured had impermissibly split his no-fault claim when he sought and obtained a dismissal without prejudice of his claim for lost wages and proceeded to arbitrate his claim for medical expenses against the insurer.
Case Name:
Nisbet v. Hennepin County, 548 N.W.2d 314 (Minn. App. 1996)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: A county's ambulance hit an injured person's truck. The injured person's negligence claim against the county was barred by the county's vicarious official immunity for the allegedly negligent actions of its ambulance driver.
Case Name:
Bacon v. Independent Sch. Dist., C7-95-212 (Minn. App. 1995)
Court: SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA
Overview: A school district was not entitled to discretionary immunity in a victim's action to recover damages for crashing into the district's rope barricade because the district's decision about what materials to use in the barricade was "operational."
Case Name:
Olson v. United States Fidelity & Guar. Co., C7-94-2385 (Minn. App. 1995)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: A stay of an employee's no-fault insurance arbitration was proper as a workers' compensation insurer was not collaterally estopped from asserting the workers' compensation issue.
Case Name:
Steele v. Great W. Casualty Co., 540 N.W.2d 886 (Minn. App. 1995)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: Summary judgment was proper for respondent insurer where insurance contract and endorsements, declarations, and exclusions as a whole, showed parties' intent to limit coverage to insured's non-business use of semi-tractor.
Case Name:
Danielson v. City of Brooklyn Park, 516 N.W.2d 203 (Minn. App. 1994)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: A City was not liable to an injured party when the injured was hurt while trying to remove a tree that the City had incorrectly diagnosed with Dutch Elm disease where under the applicable statute the City did not owe the injured party a special duty.
Case Name:
Butcher v. Mutual Service Casualty Ins. Co., C1-92-1986 (Minn. App. 1993)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: Under a policy issued by her insurer, the insured had no right to uninsured motorist benefits because her execution of releases meant that she was not "legally entitled to collect" from the driver or owner of an "uninsured motor vehicle."
Case Name:
Fundingsland v. Johnson, CO-92-1266 (Minn. App. 1993)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: Evidence of even one previous incident from which a jury could find that an animal had a propensity to be dangerous was sufficient to avoid summary judgment in an action brought against horse owners by an individual who was kicked by a horse.
Case Name:
Brown v. Allstate Ins. Co. , 481 N.W.2d 17 (Minn. 1992)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: Although insureds had accident-related expenses amounting to more than $ 5,000, if they were willing to reduce part of their respective claims in order to obtain mandatory arbitration, they were entitled to do so.
Case Name:
Kryzer v. Champlin American Legion No. 600, 494 N.W.2d 35 (Minn. 1992).
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: Plaintiffs could not recover under the Minnesota Civil Damage Act for an injury received based on the sale of liquor to an intoxicated individual because the individual's intoxication did not cause her injuries.
Case Name:
Polzin v. O'Brien, C6-91-2038 (Minn. App. 1992)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: In a widow's wrongful death action against her deceased husband's employer, the employer's breach of its duty to provide safe working instrumentalities was not a breach of any personal duty by its corporate officers or its maintenance supervisor.
Case Name:
Anderson v. Independent Sch. Dist. No. 891, C2-98-1556, C4-98-1557 (Minn. App.1999)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: School district was immune from negligence action brought by minor who was injured while playing basketball on school district property because the school district had recreational immunity
Case Name:
Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Makhloufi, C8-96-1539 ( Minn. App. 1996)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: Trial court properly decided that insured had impermissibly split his no-fault claim when he sought and obtained a dismissal without prejudice of his claim for lost wages and proceeded to arbitrate his claim for medical expenses against the insurer.
Case Name:
Bacon v. Independent Sch. Dist., C7-95-212 (Minn. App. 1995)
Court: SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA
Overview: A school district was not entitled to discretionary immunity in a victim's action to recover damages for crashing into the district's rope barricade because the district's decision about what materials to use in the barricade was "operational."
Case Name:
Brown v. Allstate Ins. Co. , 481 N.W.2d 17 (Minn. 1992)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: Although insureds had accident-related expenses amounting to more than $ 5,000, if they were willing to reduce part of their respective claims in order to obtain mandatory arbitration, they were entitled to do so.
Case Name:
Butcher v. Mutual Service Casualty Ins. Co., C1-92-1986 (Minn. App. 1993)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: Under a policy issued by her insurer, the insured had no right to uninsured motorist benefits because her execution of releases meant that she was not "legally entitled to collect" from the driver or owner of an "uninsured motor vehicle."
Case Name:
Butcher v. Mutual Service Casualty Ins. Co., C1-92-1986 (Minn. App. 1993)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: Under a policy issued by her insurer, the insured had no right to uninsured motorist benefits because her execution of releases meant that she was not "legally entitled to collect" from the driver or owner of an "uninsured motor vehicle."
Case Name:
Cameron v. Manners, C2-01-1908 (Minn. App. 2002)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: A court erred by granting stepfather's motion for summary judgment in stepdaughter's personal injury suit, where she was injured by a fence erected while she was in the house, and the stepfather should have known she might not have noticed it.
Case Name:
Danielson v. City of Brooklyn Park, 516 N.W.2d 203 (Minn. App. 1994)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: A City was not liable to an injured party when the injured was hurt while trying to remove a tree that the City had incorrectly diagnosed with Dutch Elm disease where under the applicable statute the City did not owe the injured party a special duty.
Case Name:
Fundingsland v. Johnson, CO-92-1266 (Minn. App. 1993)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: Evidence of even one previous incident from which a jury could find that an animal had a propensity to be dangerous was sufficient to avoid summary judgment in an action brought against horse owners by an individual who was kicked by a horse.
Case Name:
Giacomino v. Tri-State Ins. Co., 595 N.W.2d 530 (Minn. App. 1999)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: Insurance company was entitled to assert its subrogation interests, because company fully compensated insured for the total loss of his vehicle based on the vehicle's market value; market value was the correct standard where it was ascertainable.
Case Name:
Golden v. Watson, C5-96-1840 (Minn. App. 1997)
Court: MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS
Overview: A client was not entitled to vacate a judgment against an attorney in the client's action for negligence because the client was not able to prove that he had a reasonable claim for a change in the amount of damages awarded in the judgment.
Case Name:
Hancock v. Independent School Dist. No. 281, C0-02-718 ( Minn. App. 2002)
Court: SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA
Overview: The trial court properly denied the school district's summary judgment motion as the school district failed to provide evidence that the school district engaged in planning-level conduct protected by statutory immunity.