HOWARD v. MINNESOTA TIMBERWOLVES BASKETBALL

No. C3-01-864.

636 N.W.2d 551 (2001)

Frank HOWARD, d/b/a Protography, Appellant, v. MINNESOTA TIMBERWOLVES BASKETBALL LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Respondent, Ogden Entertainment, Inc., Respondent.

Court of Appeals of Minnesota.

November 27, 2001.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Harvey H. Eckart, Reinhardt and Anderson, St. Paul, MN, for appellant.

Douglas R. Peterson, Mankato, MN; and David M. Jaffe, Leonard, Street and Deinard, Minneapolis, MN, for respondent Timberwolves.

Eric J. Rucker, Briggs and Morgan, Minneapolis, MN, for respondent Ogden.

Considered and decided by STONEBURNER, Presiding Judge, TOUSSAINT, Judge, and WILLIS, Judge.


OPINION

STONEBURNER, Judge.

On appeal from a grant of summary judgment, appellant Frank Howard argues that the district court made impermissible findings of fact and erred as a matter of law in concluding that the Timberwolves (team) acted as a single entity to limit Howard's access to the Target Center to photograph team games and did not violate antitrust laws, and erred by granting summary judgment on his claims for tortious interference with prospective...

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