Opay v. Howard Lake Liquor Store

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Opay v. Howard Lake Liquor Store

531 N.W.2d 845, 1995 Minn. LEXIS 449, 1995 WL 326731

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedMay 26, 1995

DocketNo. C9-94-1447

StatusPublished

This text of 531 N.W.2d 845 (Opay v. Howard Lake Liquor Store) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Opay v. Howard Lake Liquor Store, 531 N.W.2d 845, 1995 Minn. LEXIS 449, 1995 WL 326731 (Mich. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

ORDER

Based upon all the files, records and proceedings herein,

[846]*846IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for further review filed on behalf of defendant Rodney Jones be, and the same is, granted for the sole purpose of reversing a portion of the unpublished court of appeals’ decision filed on January 31, 1995 and directing the reinstatement of the summary judgment entered in Jones’ favor in the Wright County District Court. The trial court found that Rodney Jones was not aware of the decedent Sonya Opay’s predicament and that “her injury and death were not foreseeable to him.” Those findings are not clearly erroneous and under those circumstances, there is no duty. See Erickson v. Curtis Inv. Co., 447 N.W.2d 165 (Minn.1989); Lundgren v. Fultz, 354 N.W.2d 25 (Minn.1984).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the separate petitions of Nicole Jones and Timothy Opay for further review be, and the same are, denied.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ M. Jeanne Coyne Associate Justice

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

Based upon all the files, records and proceedings herein,

[846]*846IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition for further review filed on behalf of defendant Rodney Jones be, and the same is, granted for the sole purpose of reversing a portion of the unpublished court of appeals’ decision filed on January 31, 1995 and directing the reinstatement of the summary judgment entered in Jones’ favor in the Wright County District Court. The trial court found that Rodney Jones was not aware of the decedent Sonya Opay’s predicament and that “her injury and death were not foreseeable to him.” Those findings are not clearly erroneous and under those circumstances, there is no duty. See Erickson v. Curtis Inv. Co., 447 N.W.2d 165 (Minn.1989); Lundgren v. Fultz, 354 N.W.2d 25 (Minn.1984).

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the separate petitions of Nicole Jones and Timothy Opay for further review be, and the same are, denied.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ M. Jeanne Coyne Associate Justice

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

531 N.W.2d 845, 1995 Minn. LEXIS 449, 1995 WL 326731, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/opay-v-howard-lake-liquor-store-minn-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack