Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Watson v. Metropolitan Transit Commission, 553 N.W.2d 406.

116 citing documents.

Maxwell Harvey, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Peter Richard Rickmyer v. Xenos Letoi Brooks, Marva Wagner in her individual capacity, and in ... Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Peter Richard Rickmyer v. Xenos Letoi Brooks, Marva Wagner in her individual capacity, and in ... Minn. Ct. App. 2025
A24-1910 Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Brianne Goad, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Transit Comm’n, (quotation omitted).
Virginia Rivas - Castro, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Transit Comm’n, (stating that court reviewing applicability of immunity “must examine with particularity the nature of the conduct the plaintiff alleges [was negligent]”).
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
MFK by and through her natural parent, Kathryn Kendrick v. Walker-Hackensack-Akeley ISD 113, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
MFK by and through her natural parent, Kathryn Kendrick v. Walker-Hackensack-Akeley ISD 113, ... Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Transit Comm’n, (holding that bus driver’s decision not to stop bus when gang members assaulted and threatened to kill passengers was discretionary).
Amanda Buxton, as trustee for the next-of-kin Tom Buxton, deceased, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Minor Doe 601, a minor, by and through his mother and natural guardian, Mother Doe 601, Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Transit Comm’n, (holding that training employees was planning- level conduct protected by statutory immunity).
Brenda Lutzke, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Transit Comm’n, (quotation omitted).
Robert C. Tengdin, Trustee of the Robert C. Tengdin Revocable Trust dated May 18, 2009, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Transit Comm’n , (“Statutory immunity exists to prevent the courts from conducting an after -the-fact review which second-guesses certain policy-making activities that are legislative or executive in nature.” (emphasis added) (quotation omitted)); (“The discr
Kay L. Briden, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Cody Lee Elven, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Andrew Ellis, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
at 490-91; see Vassallo, d at 463-65 (holding that police officer’s decision to proceed through intersection at high speed with squad car’s lights on but sirens off was discretionary); Kari v. City of Maplewood , (holding that paramedic’s driving in response to emergency was discretionary); Watson v. Metro Transi t Comm’n , (holding that bus driver’s decision not to stop bus when gang members assaulted and threatened to kill passengers was discretionary); Pletan v. Gaines , 7 (Minn. 1992) (holdi
Waasohn Dorliae, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See Watson by Hanson v. Metro Transit Comm’n , (holding that official immunity protects discretionary rather than ministerial duties).
Douglas W. Wenker, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Hanson v. Metropolitan Transit Comm’n
Nell Mathews, et al. Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Transit Comm’n, (quotation omitted).
Hall v. State 908 N.W.2d 345 Minn. 2018
Hall v. State 908 N.W.2d 345 Minn. 2018
Transit Comm'n , , 411 (Minn. 1996).
Wade Sotona and Kristine Sotona, as co-trustees for the next-of-kin of Brody Sotona, decedent, Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Transit Comm’n, (“Where an employee or agent is protected by official immunity, the government entity will not be called on to indemnify that individual nor will the government entity be liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior.”).
Magnolia 8 Properties, LLC v. City of Maple Plain 893 N.W.2d 658 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Magnolia 8 Properties, LLC v. City of Maple Plain 893 N.W.2d 658 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Transit Comm’n, (quotation omitted).
Go Green Energy, LLC, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Transit Comm’n , (applying immunity because appellant’s “challenges amount to an attack upon the policies themselves”).
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
Transit Comm’n, (“Official immunity 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
Delmer v. Fladwood v. City of St. Paul Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Delmer v. Fladwood v. City of St. Paul Minn. Ct. App. 2016
No. 16, -24, 23 n.20 (Minn. 1998); Watson by Hanson v. Metropolitan Transit Comm’n
Jason Jalony Cox v. Dakota County Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Jason Jalony Cox v. Dakota County Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Barbara Kuntz v. Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Barbara Kuntz v. Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board Minn. Ct. App. 2015
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
Juan Edward Shariss v. City of Bloomington 852 N.W.2d 278 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Juan Edward Shariss v. City of Bloomington 852 N.W.2d 278 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
nternal quotation marks omitted); see, e.g., Vassallo, d at 463-64 (holding that police officer’s decision to proceed through intersection at high speed with squad car’s lights on but sirens off was discretionary); (holding that paramedic’s driving in response to emergency was discretionary); Watson v. Metro Transit Comm’n, (holding that bus driver’s decision not to stop bus when gang members assaulted and threatened to kill passengers was discretionary); (holding that police offer’s decision to
Vassallo ex rel. Brown v. Majeski 842 N.W.2d 456 Minn. 2014
Vassallo ex rel. Brown v. Majeski 842 N.W.2d 456 Minn. 2014
Transit Comm’n, (“Where an employee or agent is protected by official immunity, the government entity will not be called on to indemnify that individual nor will the government entity be liable under the doctrine of respondeat superior.”).
Siewert v. Northern States Power Co. 793 N.W.2d 272 Minn. 2011
Siewert v. Northern States Power Co. 793 N.W.2d 272 Minn. 2011
Hoffman v. Northern States Power Co. 764 N.W.2d 34 Minn. 2009
Hoffman v. Northern States Power Co. 764 N.W.2d 34 Minn. 2009
Watson by Hanson v. Metropolitan Transit Comm’n
JW Ex Rel. BRW v. 287 INTER. DIST. 761 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
J.W. ex rel. B.R.W. v. 287 Intermediate District 761 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
JW Ex Rel. BRW v. 287 INTER. DIST. 761 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
J.W. ex rel. B.R.W. v. 287 Intermediate District 761 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
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