Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Harper v. Herman, 499 N.W.2d 472.

40 citing documents.

Josh Campion, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
at *3 (-75 (Minn. 1993)).
Fred Newell v. Timothy Eide, and third party v. Norcostco, Inc., Third Party Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Fred Newell v. Timothy Eide, and third party v. Norcostco, Inc., Third Party Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Catlin Underwriting Agencies, Ltd. v. ALLETE, Inc., d/b/a Minnesota Power, Schneider Electric USA, Inc., f/k/a Square D Company, … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Catlin Underwriting Agencies, Ltd. v. ALLETE, Inc., d/b/a Minnesota Power, Schneider Electric USA, Inc., f/k/a Square D Company, … Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Even if Minnesota Power knew of the potential risk of the 0.2 setting, and even if it had superior knowledge of the risk (which the record does not establish), “superior knowledge of a dangerous condition by itself, in the absence of a duty to provide protection, is insufficient to establish liability in negligence.”
Domagala v. Rolland 805 N.W.2d 14 Minn. 2011
Domagala v. Rolland 805 N.W.2d 14 Minn. 2011
See, (holding that a boat owner had no duty to warn a social guest of shallow water-depth when the parties were not in a special relationship).
DOMAGALA v. Rolland 787 N.W.2d 662 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
DOMAGALA v. Rolland 787 N.W.2d 662 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
“[A]n affirmative duty to act only arises when a special relationship exists between the parties.”
Bjerke v. Johnson 742 N.W.2d 660 Minn. 2007
Bjerke v. Johnson 742 N.W.2d 660 Minn. 2007
The second arises when an individual, whether voluntarily or as required by law, has “custody of another person under circumstances in which that other person is deprived of normal opportunities of self-protection.” Restatement (Second) of Torts § 314A (1965).
Becker v. Mayo Foundation 737 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 2007
Becker v. Mayo Foundation 737 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 2007
Bjerke v. Johnson 727 N.W.2d 183 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Bjerke v. Johnson 727 N.W.2d 183 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
A special relationship exists under section 314A when a person voluntarily takes “custody of another person under circumstances in which that other person is deprived of normal opportunities for self-protection.” (citing Restatement (Second) of Torts § 314A).
Laska v. Anoka County 696 N.W.2d 133 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Laska v. Anoka County 696 N.W.2d 133 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
A “special relationship” giving rise to a legal duty to protect another exists where one person has “custody of another person under circumstances in which that other person is deprived of normal opportunities of self-protection.”
Meyer v. Lindala 675 N.W.2d 635 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Meyer v. Lindala 675 N.W.2d 635 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
between the actor and the other which gives the other the right to protection.” (alteration in original) (quotation omitted).
Louis v. Louis 636 N.W.2d 314 Minn. 2001
Louis v. Louis 636 N.W.2d 314 Minn. 2001
-08 (Minn.1996); -75 (Minn.1993); (ah holding no duty because there was no special relationship between the parties).
Snilsberg v. Lake Washington Club 614 N.W.2d 738 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Snilsberg v. Lake Washington Club 614 N.W.2d 738 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Bigos v. Kluender 611 N.W.2d 816 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Bigos v. Kluender 611 N.W.2d 816 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
“[Sjuperior knowledge of a dangerous condition by itself, in the absence of a duty to provide protection, is insufficient to establish liability in negligence.”
Gilbertson v. Leininger 599 N.W.2d 127 Minn. 1999
Gilbertson v. Leininger 599 N.W.2d 127 Minn. 1999
(citing Restatement (Second) of Torts § 314A (1965)).
HB by and Through Clark v. Whittemore 552 N.W.2d 705 Minn. 1996
HB by and Through Clark v. Whittemore 552 N.W.2d 705 Minn. 1996
On the other hand, we considered whether there was a special relationship upon which a duty to warn could be premised when Herman, a boat owner, failed to warn Harper, his guest, that the boat was anchored in water dangerously shallow for diving.
Donaldson v. Young Women's Christian Ass'n of Duluth 539 N.W.2d 789 Minn. 1995
Donaldson v. Young Women's Christian Ass'n of Duluth 539 N.W.2d 789 Minn. 1995
Restatement (Second) of Torts § 314A.
Cooney v. Hooks 535 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 1995
Cooney v. Hooks 535 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 1995
When, however, a person has custody of another under circumstances in which the other person is “deprived of normal opportunities of self protection,” such a duty is imposed on the custodian because of the special relationship that exists between custodian and detainee.
Doe v. Brainerd International Raceway, Inc. 533 N.W.2d 617 Minn. 1995
Doe v. Brainerd International Raceway, Inc. 533 N.W.2d 617 Minn. 1995
Lundman v. McKown 530 N.W.2d 807 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Lundman v. McKown 530 N.W.2d 807 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Errico v. Southland Corp. 509 N.W.2d 585 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Spitzak v. Hylands, Ltd. 500 N.W.2d 154 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Spitzak v. Hylands, Ltd. 500 N.W.2d 154 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Restatement (Second) of Torts § 315 (1965)