Law Commons^™

Close Encounters Of The Third Kind: The Third Restatement, Duty, And Foreseeability, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

The Restatement (Third) of Torts: Liability for Physical and Emotional Harm (the “Third Restatement”) was adopted by the American Law Institute in 2010. The approach taken by the Third Restatement to negligence law excludes foreseeability from the duty determination and places it squarely as a relevant factor in the breach issue; it adopts the “but-for” standard for causation; and rejects proximate cause terminology, instead utilizing a scope of liability approach in which the key question is whether the harms that occurred were of the same general type that made the actor’s conduct tortious. Removal of foreseeability from the duty determination …

Mypillow Lands Hard In Judge Wright’S Court, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

In Smartmatic USA Corp. v. Lindell, Smartmatic sued Michael Lindell and MyPillow, Inc. in Minnesota federal district court, alleging defamation and violation of Minnesota’s Deceptive Trade Practices Act based on Lindell’s claims of fraud in the 2020 presidential election, including that Smartmatic voting machines were rigged. This post focuses on Smartmatic’s defamation claim against Lindell and MyPillow.

Patient Decision Aids Improve Patient Safety And Reduce Medical Liability Risk, Thaddeus Pope

Faculty Scholarship

Tort-based doctrines of informed consent have utterly failed to assure that patients understand the risks, benefits, and alternatives to the healthcare they receive. Fifty years of experience with the doctrine of informed consent have shown it to be an abject catastrophe. Most patients lack an even minimal understanding of their treatment options. But there is hope. Substantial evidence shows that patient decision aids (PDAs) and shared decision making can bridge the gap between the theory and practice of informed consent. These evidence-based educational tools empower patients to make decisions with significantly more knowledge and less decisional conflict than clinician-patient discussions …

Public Official, Figures, And Controversies In Minnesota Defamation Law, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

In Minnesota, the plaintiff in a common law defamation claim is entitled to recover presumed damages in libel and slander per se cases. Those rules change when the First Amendment is injected into defamation cases when the plaintiff is a public official or figure or is a private person involved in a public controversy. A plaintiff who is a public official or figure must prove not only the elements of the common law defamation claim, but also that the defamatory communication was a false statement of fact and prove by clear and convincing evidence that it was made with actual …

Ventura V. Kyle And American Sniper; The Anatomy Of A Public Figure’S Lawsuit, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

Chris Kyle's book, American Sniper, detailed his exploits as a prolific Navy SEAL sniper. In a book subchapter Kyle detailed an encounter with a "Mr. Scruff Face" in a San Diego Bar. The book states that Ventura made certain statements that were demeaning of the United States and the Navy SEALS. Scruff Face was subsequently identified by Chris Kyle as Jesse Ventura, former governor of Minnesota. Ventura sued Chris Kyle for defamation, appropriation, and unjust enrichment. Relying on trial court documents, briefs, and the opinions in the case, this article probes those theories of recovery with an emphasis on the …

Taxing Anxiety, Morgan Holcomb

Faculty Scholarship

In this article, I argue for a statutory change to the disparity in the taxation of damages. I submit that nearly all damages, including damages received on account of physical injury, ought to be taxable, and that juries must be apprised of tax consequences so that they can make proper adjustments to take account of these tax consequences. I will refer to this as the full inclusion proposal with jury awareness - for ease, the full inclusion proposal.

My proposed change is the more sound solution for several reasons. Full inclusion creates certainty and avoids wasteful tax gamesmanship. Furthermore, assuming …

The Domagala Dilemma-Domagala V. Rolland, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

In Domagala v. Rolland, the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review in a personal injury case that was dominated by duty and special relationship issues, even though the parties agreed that there was no special relationship between them. The case, straddling the misfeasance/nonfeasance line, was complicated by the defense theory (that the lack of a special relationship meant that the defendant owed no duty to protect or warn the plaintiff), and the plaintiff’s theory (that the defendant owed a duty of reasonable care to the plaintiff because he acted affirmatively, even if the risk to the plaintiff did not become apparent …

Minnesota Negligence Law And The Restatement (Third) Of Torts: Liability For Physical And Emotional Harms, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

The purpose of this article is to provide a foundation for judges and lawyers, primarily in Minnesota, who are seeking to understand how the Third Restatement’s approach to negligence law fits with Minnesota negligence law. The first Part of the article examines the approach of the Third Restatement. Because decisions in other states applying the Third Restatement will be important for courts in Minnesota and elsewhere in deciding whether to apply the Third Restatement, the second Part examines early reports on the Third Restatement in Iowa, Nebraska, Arizona, Wisconsin, Tennessee, and Delaware.

My Lawyer Told Me To Say I'M Sorry: Lawyers, Doctors, And Medical Apologies, Peter B. Knapp

Faculty Scholarship

The role of apologies in litigation has received a great deal of attention in the last ten years. This is particularly true of “medical apologies,” those expressions of regret and, in some cases, admissions of responsibility made by health care professionals. Two recent trends have prompted examination of medical apologies. First, widely reported empirical studies suggest that patients and their families may be less likely to bring malpractice lawsuits following adverse outcomes if treating physicians have apologized. Second, over about the past ten years, two-thirds of the states have adopted statutes that exclude these apologies from evidence if there is …

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

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

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

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. …

The Character Of The Minnesota Tort System, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

The specific focus of this article is whether the Minnesota tort system is progressive. The answer to that question depends on a number of other questions. First, what are the components of the tort system? Second, what are the primary motivating principles of the system? Third, how is the term “progressive” defined for purposes of evaluating the system, and as applied to the tort system, what conclusions does it yield? Other questions might be whether the tort system in Minnesota is liberal, or conservative, or, perhaps, moderate, with the overriding question of whether those labels make any difference.

Judicial Deference Or Bad Law? Why Massachusetts Courts Will Not Impose Municipal Liability For Failure To Enforce Restraining Orders, Carolyn Grose

Faculty Scholarship

The authors take up the challenge that was thrown down by the Ford v. Town of Grafton court. The first part of this Article examines the somewhat tortured and fascinating history of the Massachusetts Tort Claims Act. It then describes the arguments Catherine Ford made, how the court responded, and why it responded as it did. In Part II, Massachusetts' strong commitment to protecting and assisting victims of domestic violence is examined. A variety of legislative, executive and judicial initiatives that demonstrate commitment are described, but the Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 209A, the restraining order statute, is emphasized. The article …

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 Role Of Primary Assumption Of Risk In Civil Litigation In Minnesota, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

Assumption of risk has presented courts with considerable difficulty in defining its theoretical justification and its relationship to tort duty limitations and to the defense of contributory negligence. In Minnesota and elsewhere, assumption of risk has been applied inconsistently. Sometimes it seems to relate to the duty issue and sometimes it is linked to the defense of contributory negligence, but without a clear differentiation of which issue is involved. In Minnesota specifically, the Minnesota Supreme Court has acknowledged that inconsistency and the difficulty in applying the concept in cases spanning several decades. This article focuses on primary assumption of risk, …

What's In A Name? Law's Identity Under The Tort Of Appropriation, Jonathan Kahn

Faculty Scholarship

This article is divided into three parts. In Part I, the article explores the notion that under the tort of appropriation, a person’s name is understood to implicate critical aspects of her identity. This notion is explored in relation to specific historical cases raising the issues of whether a woman who adopts her husband’s name has a property right in that name and whether a person who adopts a professional or stage name has separate rights in that name apart from his legal name. Second, Part II focuses on a person’s right to maintain the integrity of his physical image. …

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 …

Defamation Per Se: Defamation By Mistake?, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

Defamation is a complicated tort, due in part to the differing rules that govern libel and slander, the two branches of the tort. The focus of this essay is on “defamation per se,” its origins in Minnesota, and the consequences of its misapplication. The essay opens with a short statement of standard defamation principles, followed by a short statement of the prevailing United States Supreme Court decisions, imposing First Amendment limitations on common law defamation claims, and the Minnesota cases that follow them. The next part analyzes a string of Minnesota cases that establish the foundation for Minnesota defamation law, …

Foreword: "Products Liability In The 21st Century Substantive U.S. And Foreign Product Liability Law", Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

The idea for this William Mitchell Law Review Symposium on products liability law belongs to Ken Ross, who currently is Of Counsel to Bowman & Brooke. He specializes in products liability law and, as a preventive law specialist representing both domestic and foreign clients, he sees products liability law from a broad prospective that necessitates an understanding of products liability law from both a domestic and international perspective that takes into consideration legislative, regulatory, and common law shifts and trends in the law. This symposium is shaped around those broad interests.

Biotechnology And The Legal Constitution Of The Self: Managing Identity In Science, The Market, And Society, Jonathan Kahn

Faculty Scholarship

This article considers how certain ideas underlying the tort of appropriation may enable use more effectively to deal with the problems presented by a case such Moore v. Regents of the University of California which dealt with property rights of Moore’s spleen cells. First, the author explores how the tort of appropriation of identity opens up new approaches to inform and perhaps supplement principles of property law as a guide to managing genetic information or other materials that seem intimately bound up with a particular human subject. Secondly, the author analyzes how the various opinions produced by the Supreme Court …

The Tale Of A Tail, James F. Hogg

Faculty Scholarship

The commercial general liability insurance industry shifted, in 1986, from the use of an “occurrence-based” to a “claims-made” policy form. So-called “tail” or “long tail” claims have continued nevertheless, to be asserted under the older “occurrence” policies which required that injury occur during the term of the policy, but not that the claim for such injury be made or brought at any particular time. In seeking state approval to use the new “claims-made” form in 1985-86, the insurance industry represented that the new form would not affect coverage under the old “occurrence” form. Despite that representation, insurers are now asserting, …

Disability And Income Loss Benefits Under The Minnesota No-Fault Act, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

The Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act was intended to ensure the “prompt payment of specific basic economic loss benefits to victims of automobile accidents without regard to whose fault caused the accident,” to prevent overcompensation of less seriously injured people by the interposition of tort thresholds, and to encourage appropriate medical and rehabilitation treatment by assuring prompt payment for that treatment. It seems clear that at least some of the initial promise of the Act has not been fulfilled. Payment of basic economic loss benefits, which the legislature intended to be paid promptly, has become bogged down in a quagmire …

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 …

With The Legislature's Permission And The Supreme Court"S Consent, Common Law Social Host Liability Returns To Minnesota, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

In 1990, the Minnesota Legislature amended the Civil Damage Act to allow for common law tort claims against persons 21 years old or older who knowingly provide alcohol to a person under 21 years of age. The 1990 amendment is unique because the legislature in effect appears to be releasing its stranglehold on liquor liability law, permitting the courts to apply common law negligence principles under the defined circumstances, but without providing any guidelines as to how the common law remedy should be formulated. The interpretive problems the amendment creates will eventually have to be resolved by the courts. The …

Fundamental Rights In The "Gray" Area: The Right Of Privacy Under The Minnesota Constitution, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

This Article explores the constitutional aspects of Minnesota privacy law. Part II briefly explains federal privacy law to provide a baseline for consideration of privacy law in Minnesota. Part III examines the right of privacy as it has evolved in the Minnesota common law. Part IV evaluates the Minnesota Supreme Court's application of federal privacy standards and then examines the court's decisions that outline the right of privacy under the Minnesota Constitution. Part V concludes by raising questions concerning the potential application of the court's concept of privacy under the Minnesota Constitution as applied to two areas: same-sex marriages and …

Keeping The Pierringer Promise: Fair Settlements And Fair Trials, Peter B. Knapp

Faculty Scholarship

This article explores why Perringer releases have failed to promise fairness to the nonsettling defendant. For over thirty years, Pierringer releases have been part of the ebb and flow of civil litigation. In 1978, the Minnesota Supreme Court officially approved the use of Pierringer releases in Minnesota. When first adopted, the release seemed to promise something for everyone. The Pierringer release even offered a promise of fairness to the nonsettling defendant: Be assured that, no matter what the outcome of trial, you will pay no more than your “fair share” of the verdict. Unfortunately, however, largely because of the impact …

The Anatomy Of Emotional Distress Claims In Minnesota, Michael K. Steenson

Faculty Scholarship

This Article examines the right to recover damages for emotional distress in Minnesota, with emphasis on claims for negligent and intentional infliction of emotional distress. The recovery of damages for emotional distress is subject to varying and perhaps seemingly inconsistent standards. After a brief history of emotional distress law, the Article will discuss claims for emotional distress based on negligence, intentional torts, and statutory violations. These areas are examined in detail to determine the standards for the recovery of emotional harm in Minnesota and to evaluate whether the standards are applied consistently. The Article also examines the right to recover …

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 …