1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.W.2d
  4. 605 N.W.2d
  5. 605 N.W.2d 738 (2000)
 

ENGVALL v. SOO LINE R.R. CO.

No. C6-99-64.

605 N.W.2d 738 (2000)

James J. ENGVALL, Plaintiff, v. SOO LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, d/b/a Canadian Pacific Railway Company, defendant and third-party plaintiff, petitioner, Appellant, v. General Motors Corporation, a foreign corporation, third-party defendant, Respondent.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

February 17, 2000.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Eric J. Magnuson, Jeffrey R. Schmidt, Peter Gray, Rider, Bennett, Egan & Arundel, LLP, Minneapolis,for appellant.

Mickey W. Greene, Hanson, Marek, Bolkcom & Greene, Ltd., Minneapolis, Thomas J. Sweeney, Mark E. Gebauer, Eckert, Seamans, Cherin & Mellott, LLC, Harrisburg, PA, for respondent.

Heard, considered, and decided by the court en banc.

OPINION

PAUL H. ANDERSON, Justice.

Appellant Soo Line Railroad Company challenges the Minnesota Court of Appeals' dismissal of its appeal from a final judgment of the Hennepin County District Court. Before entering final judgment, the district court had granted respondent General Motors Corporation's (GM) motion for summary judgment on the grounds of federal preemption. The court of appeals characterized the grant of summary judgment as an immediately appealable...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases