Minnesota Court Of Appeals Cites David McKee MD V. Dennis K. Laurion In Its Opinion A15-1149: Richard J Hartfiel V Raymond Wilburn Allison, T. J. Potter Trucking, Raymond Wilburn Allison, And Westfield Insurance Company

Standard

 

 STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS

A15 – 1149

Richard J. Hartfiel, Appellant,

vs.

Raymond Wilburn Allison, Respondent, T. J. Potter Trucking, Inc., Respondent, Westfield Insurance Company, Intervenor, Respondent.

Filed January 25, 2016

Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

Schellhas, Judge

Sherburne County District Court File No. 71 – CV – 11 – 1331

U N P U B L I S H E D  O P I N I O N

Appellant challenges the summary judgment dismissal of his claims against  respondent trucking company for negligent hiring and negligent retention of respondent employee. Appellant also argues that the district court erred by concluding that an alleged settlement agreement between appellant and respondent trucking company is unenforceable and by permitting the trucking company’s insurance company to intervene in the action.

We affirm in part, reverse in part,, and remand.

Hartfiel argues that the district court erred by granting summary judgment to Potter Trucking on his claims of negligent hiring and negligent retention because genuine issues of material fact exist, the court improperly weighed the evidence, and the court failed to prop erly apply the law.

. . .

At oral argument, Hartfiel acknowledged that he had forfeited any argument that the district court erred by dismissing his negligent -supervision claim against Potter Trucking.

No genuine issue for trial exists when the record taken as a whole could not lead a rational trier of fact to find for the nonmoving party.” [Appellate courts] review a district court’s summary judgment decision de novo. In doing so, [appellate courts] determine whether the district court properly applied the law and whether there are genuine issues of material fact that preclude summary judgment.[Appellate courts] view the evidence in the light most favorable to the party against whom summary judgment was granted. McKee v. Laurion, 825 N.W.2d 725, 729 (Minn. 2013).

FULL OPINION

Defendant Dennis Laurion’s Web Posting

Defendant Dennis Laurion’s Patient Complaint

Plaintiff David McKee’s Reply To Patient Complaint

Plaintiff David McKee’s Cease And Desist Letter To Defendant Dennis Laurion

Defendant Dennis Laurion’s Complaint To Minnesota Board Of Medical Practice

Plaintiff David McKee’s Complaint To Sixth Judicial District Duluth Court

Plaintiff David McKee’s Response To Minnesota Board Of Medical Practice

Defendant Dennis Laurion’s Answer To Plaintiff David McKee’s Complaint

Defendant Dennis Laurion’s Motion For Summary Judgment

Defendant Dennis Laurion’s Deposition Extracts

Plaintiff David McKee’s Deposition Testimony About Circumstances Before Encounter With Laurion Family

Plaintiff David McKee’s Deposition Testimony About Encounter With Laurion Family

Plaintiff David McKee’s Deposition Testimony About Circumstances After Encounter With Laurion Family

Plaintiff David McKee’s Deposition Testimony In Response To Questions By Marshall Tanick

Affidavits By Defendant Dennis Laurion’s Parents

Defendant Dennis Laurion’s Supplemental Motion For Summary Judgment

Plaintiff David McKee’s Motion To Oppose Summary Judgment

Defendant Dennis Laurion’s Reply Memo In Support Of Motion For Summary Judgment

Sixth Judicial District Court’s Order On Motion For Summary Judgment

Plaintiff David McKee’s Appeal Of Order On Motion For Summary Judgment

Plaintiff David McKee’s Brief To Minnesota Court Of Appeals

Defendant Dennis Laurion’s Brief To Minnesota Court Of Appeals

Plaintiff David McKee’s Reply Brief To Minnesota Court Of Appeals

Minnesota Court Of Appeals Order To Strike Portion Of Plaintiff David McKee’s Reply Brief

Minnesota Court Of Appeals Announces Decision

Defendant Dennis Laurion’s Petition For Review By Minnesota Supreme Court

Plaintiff David McKee’s Opposition To Review By Minnesota Supreme Court

Defendant Dennis Laurion’s Brief To Minnesota Supreme Court

Plaintiff David McKee’s Brief To Minnesota Supreme Court

Defendant Dennis Laurion’s Reply Brief To Minnesota Supreme Court

Minnesota Supreme Court Decision On David McKee MD V. Dennis K. Laurion

David McKee MD v. Dennis Laurion 2010

David McKee MD v. Dennis Laurion 2011

David McKee MD v. Dennis Laurion 2012

David McKee MD v. Dennis Laurion 2013

McKee V Laurion Is A Textbook Case

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s