Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Nusbaum v. County of Blue Earth, 422 N.W.2d 713.

181 citing documents.

Richard Joseph Terfehr v. Buffalo-Red River Watershed District, Wilkin ... Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Richard Joseph Terfehr v. Buffalo-Red River Watershed District, Wilkin ... Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Daniel Francis Link, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“Statutory grants of immunity are narrowly construed” and “rest in the notion that the judicial branch of government should not, through the medium of tort actions, second-guess certain policy- making activities that are legislative or executive in nature.” d 631, 634 (Minn. App. 2016)
Linda Holper v. City of Gilman Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Linda Holper v. City of Gilman Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Brianne Goad, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
at 479-80 (citing Watson, d at 413; n.6 (Minn. 1988); ).
Minor Doe 601, a minor, by and through his mother and natural guardian, Mother Doe 601, Appellants, vs. … Minn. 2025
Minor Doe 601, a minor, by and through his mother and natural guardian, Mother Doe 601, Appellants, vs. … Minn. 2025
d 713, 718 (Minn. 1988); see generally Michael K. Jordan, Finding a Useful Path Through the Immunity Thicket, Bench & Bar of Minn., Oct.
Christina Berrier v. Minnesota State Patrol 9 N.W.3d 368 Minn. 2024
Christina Berrier v. Minnesota State Patrol 9 N.W.3d 368 Minn. 2024
with limited exceptions of immunity.”
Christine L. Rathbun v. Fillmore County Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Christine L. Rathbun v. Fillmore County Minn. Ct. App. 2024
No. 621, -18 (Minn. 1988) (detailing history of sovereign immunity in Minnesota).
Shane Feldhaus v. City of Minnetonka Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Shane Feldhaus v. City of Minnetonka Minn. Ct. App. 2024
The city has the burden of proving “that it is immune under the discretionary function exception.” n.6 (Minn. 1988).
Minor Doe 601, a minor, by and through his mother and natural guardian, Mother Doe 601, Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Alexander Aguilar, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“[G]overnment conduct is protected only where the state produces evidence that the conduct was of a policy- making nature involving social, political, or economical considerations.”
Robert C. Tengdin, Trustee of the Robert C. Tengdin Revocable Trust dated May 18, 2009, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
This immunity limits the disrupt ion of the “balanced separation of powers of the three branches of government.” Nusbaum v. Blue Earth County , 18 (Minn. 1988) (quotation omitted).
William Jepsen, as Trustee for the Heirs and Next of Kin of Eric Parker Dean, Minn. 2021
In simpler terms, planning level decisions require the “balancing of policy objectives.”
Stacey Marable, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Dorene Larson, as Trustee for the heirs of Megan Marie Lehner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Wade Sotona and Kristine Sotona, as co-trustees for the next-of-kin of Brody Sotona, decedent, Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Nusbaum v. County of Blue Earth
Go Green Energy, LLC, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“The major underpinnings for the discretionary function exception to governmental tort liability rest in the notion that the judicial branch of government should not, through the medium of tort actions, second -guess certain policy -making activities that are legislative or executive in nature.”
Simon McCullough v. City of Red Wing Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Simon McCullough v. City of Red Wing Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Nathan Kariniemi v. City of Rockford 882 N.W.2d 593 Minn. 2016
Nathan Kariniemi v. City of Rockford 882 N.W.2d 593 Minn. 2016
mmunity protects employees or agents of the government entity.”).8 We first 8 Statutory immunity, by contrast, is available only to “governmental entities,” and “prevent[s] the courts from conducting an after-the-fact review which second-guesses ‘certain policy-making activities that are legislative or executive in nature.’ ” Watson, d at 412 ().
Delmer v. Fladwood v. City of St. Paul Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Delmer v. Fladwood v. City of St. Paul Minn. Ct. App. 2016
A. Approximately a quarter century ago, Justice Simonett wrote that, in determining whether the doctrine of official immunity applies, “it is essential to identify the precise governmental conduct at issue.” (emphasis added) ().
Jessica Mattson v. City of Rushford, Minnowa Construction, Inc., State of Minnesota Department of Transportation, Edwards and Kelcey, … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Jessica Mattson v. City of Rushford, Minnowa Construction, Inc., State of Minnesota Department of Transportation, Edwards and Kelcey, … Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Barbara Kuntz v. Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Barbara Kuntz v. Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(noting the imprecision involved in distinguishing between discretionary and operational conduct); Holmquist, d at 234 (acknowledging that even the implementation of a policy may involve policy- making).
Wallace Armstrong v. Hasbargen Logging, Inc., State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Wallace Armstrong v. Hasbargen Logging, Inc., State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Nathan Kariniemi v. City of Rockford 863 N.W.2d 430 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Nathan Kariniemi v. City of Rockford 863 N.W.2d 430 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
of Blue Earth, (emphasis added), the Kariniemis’ focus on the design of the storm-drainage system waives a challenge to the district court’s negligent-approval ruling.
City of Minneapolis v. Ames & Fischer Co. II, LLP 724 N.W.2d 749 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
City of Minneapolis v. Ames & Fischer Co. II, LLP 724 N.W.2d 749 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Hans Hagen Homes, Inc. v. City of Minnetrista 713 N.W.2d 916 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Schroeder v. St. Louis County 708 N.W.2d 497 Minn. 2006
Schroeder v. St. Louis County 708 N.W.2d 497 Minn. 2006
Meier v. City of Columbia Heights 686 N.W.2d 858 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Meier v. City of Columbia Heights 686 N.W.2d 858 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
at 660; (holding a challenge to employees’ application of a policy is a challenge to the policy itself, not the conduct of the employees).
Unzen v. City of Duluth 683 N.W.2d 875 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Unzen v. City of Duluth 683 N.W.2d 875 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
To determine whether discretionary immunity applies, the courts must “identify the precise government conduct being challenged.”
Anderson v. Anoka Hennepin Independent School District 11 678 N.W.2d 651 Minn. 2004
Anderson v. Anoka Hennepin Independent School District 11 678 N.W.2d 651 Minn. 2004
Minder v. Anoka County 677 N.W.2d 479 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Minder v. Anoka County 677 N.W.2d 479 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Olmanson v. Le Sueur County 673 N.W.2d 506 Minn. Ct. App. 2004