Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 9 of 9
Full-Text Articles in Torts
The Legacy Of The 9/11 Fund And The Minnesota I-35w Bridge-Collapse Fund: Creating A Template For Compensating Victims Of Future Mass-Tort Catastrophes, Michael K. Steenson
The Legacy Of The 9/11 Fund And The Minnesota I-35w Bridge-Collapse Fund: Creating A Template For Compensating Victims Of Future Mass-Tort Catastrophes, Michael K. Steenson
Faculty Scholarship
The purpose of this article is to analyze and compare the 9/11 Fund and the Minnesota bridge-collapse compensation scheme for purposes of illustrating the necessary components of any future compensation schemes legislatures consider adopting in cases involving other catastrophes. This article first sets out the primary issues that must be addressed when considering a compensation scheme. It then examines the choices made in the 9/11 Fund and Minnesota’s bridge-collapse compensation scheme. A brief comparison of the two compensation schemes follows to provide the framework for considering the components of future compensation schemes.
Peterson V. Balach, Obvious Dangers, And The Duty Of Possessors Of Land In Minnesota, Michael K. Steenson
Peterson V. Balach, Obvious Dangers, And The Duty Of Possessors Of Land In Minnesota, Michael K. Steenson
Faculty Scholarship
The purpose of this article is to analyze Minnesota landowners law, with particular emphasis on the impact of Peterson v. Balach. Following a short history of Minnesota law governing possessors’ duties, including a discussion of pre-Peterson v. Balach and Adee v. Evanson cases, the article considers the question of why the courts, post-Peterson v. Balach/Adee v. Evanson, regularly return to pre-Peterson forms to resolve possessor liability issues, particularly in cases involving obvious dangers, and whether the phenomenon is a result of a wrong turn or is a reflection of a conscious policy choice intended to effectively repudiate the progressive position …
Radke V. County Of Freeborn: The Return Of The Public Duty Rule?, Mehmet K. Konar-Steenberg
Radke V. County Of Freeborn: The Return Of The Public Duty Rule?, Mehmet K. Konar-Steenberg
Faculty Scholarship
Article explores when Minnesota law provides a cause of action against government actors who are negligent in the performance of their duties. Part II of this Article traces the separate development of the common law public duty rule and the implied statutory cause of action analysis. Part III examines the Hoppe case, where the supreme court seemed to hold that the absence of an implied statutory cause of action precluded the existence of a common law cause of action. Part IV then assesses the Radke court’s effort to resolve the confusion flowing from Hoppe.
Engler V. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. And Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress, Michael K. Steenson
Engler V. Illinois Farmers Insurance Co. And Negligent Infliction Of Emotional Distress, Michael K. Steenson
Faculty Scholarship
The rules governing negligent infliction of emotional distress claims differ significantly from state to state. The predominant rule is the bystander recovery rule, which permits recovery by persons who are not physically threatened by the defendant’s negligent conduct but who suffer emotional distress from witnessing injury to a third person. In bystander recovery jurisdictions, the required degree of proximity of the plaintiff to the accident scene, how the plaintiff hears about the accident, the plaintiff’s relationship to the person actually injured in the accident, and the proof required to establish severe emotional distress vary, sometimes significantly, from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. …
Joint And Several Liability In Minnesota: The 2003 Model, Michael K. Steenson
Joint And Several Liability In Minnesota: The 2003 Model, Michael K. Steenson
Faculty Scholarship
The 2003 amendment to Minnesota’s Comparative Act can be assessed in various ways. Whether it will have the economic impact its proponents suggest it will have is a question that is not susceptible of a ready answer now, or perhaps in the immediate future. From a fairness standpoint, any assessment of the amendment has to take into consideration the full reach of the Comparative Fault Act. It is important to understand that on balance the Act works to the disadvantage of the plaintiff in a variety of ways. The plaintiff cannot recover if the plaintiff’s fault is greater than the …
The Impact Of "Exceptional" Statutes On Civil Litigation In Minnesota, Michael K. Steenson
The Impact Of "Exceptional" Statutes On Civil Litigation In Minnesota, Michael K. Steenson
Faculty Scholarship
This article examines the treatment of “exceptional” statutes--statutes intended to protect a specific class of persons against their own inability to protect themselves--by the Minnesota appellate courts. After an analysis of the origins of the negligence per se doctrine in Minnesota, the article briefly examines the relationship between negligence per se and common law negligence. Then, following a brief historical background discussion of earlier cases involving exceptional statutes, the article focuses on individual cases in which the exceptional statutes are implicated. The goal of the article is to determine whether the law the supreme court developed has been consistently adhered …
A Comparative Analysis Of Minnesota Products Liability Law And The Restatement (Third) Of Torts: Products Liability, Michael K. Steenson
A Comparative Analysis Of Minnesota Products Liability Law And The Restatement (Third) Of Torts: Products Liability, Michael K. Steenson
Faculty Scholarship
This Article compares the Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability with Minnesota products liability law. The Restatement (Third) of Torts: Products Liability provides a yardstick for measuring products liability law in each individual state. Minnesota's law is largely similar to the rules set out in the Restatement. While Minnesota has not yet adopted all of the positions in all of the rules, the Minnesota Supreme Court has taken positions on the rules governing liability, which are substantially the same. It no longer seems possible to argue that negligence principles do not control in cases involving design defect and failure to …
Joint And Several Liability Minnesota Style, Michael K. Steenson
Joint And Several Liability Minnesota Style, Michael K. Steenson
Faculty Scholarship
This article examines the rule of joint and several liability as it was adopted, modified, and applied in Minnesota circa 1989. The article first examines the judicial origins and applications of the rule in Minnesota. It then analyzes the impact of the comparative negligence and fault legislation on the rule of joint and several liability, including the limitations imposed on the rule in 1978, 1986, and 1988. Finally, it makes some suggestions for interpreting joint and several liability legislation that are consistent with the legislative history of the legislation as well as with Minnesota Supreme Court decisions concerning aggregation under …
The Anatomy Of Products Liability In Minnesota: The Theories Of Recovery, Michael K. Steenson
The Anatomy Of Products Liability In Minnesota: The Theories Of Recovery, Michael K. Steenson
Faculty Scholarship
The law of products Iiability has undergone a dramatic evolution since MacPherson v. Buick Motor Co. As a result of this rapid development, substantial uncertainty as to the scope of liability of product manufacturers and sellers exists. The purpose of this Article is to eliminate some of that confusion. After tracing the history and development of the law of products liability in Minnesota, the author discusses the various elements and standards of strict Iiability. Finally, the author proposes several jury instructions that help clarify the relationship between strict liability and negligence. Throughout the Article, Minnesota is used as a model …