JANE DOE 43C v. DIOCESE OF NEW ULM

No. A10-374.

787 N.W.2d 680 (2010)

JANE DOE 43C, et al., Appellants, v. DIOCESE OF NEW ULM, et al., Respondents.

Court of Appeals of Minnesota.

August 31, 2010.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Jeffrey R. Anderson , Kathleen P. O'Connor , Jeff Anderson & Associates, St. Paul, MN, for appellants.

Thomas B. Wieser , Jennifer R. Larimore , Meier, Kennedy & Quinn, Chtd., St. Paul, MN, for respondents.

Considered and decided by PETERSON, Presiding Judge; WRIGHT, Judge; and LARKIN, Judge.


OPINION

LARKIN, Judge.

Appellants assert that the district court erred by granting summary judgment in respondents' favor on their intentional-misrepresentation claim. We conclude that the district court erred by determining that appellants' claim was time barred under the statute of limitations. But because appellants' intentional-misrepresentation claim is based solely on nondisclosure, and appellants did not establish that respondents had a duty to disclose...

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