Free Newsletter
Torts – Malicious Prosecution
admin//November 15, 2010//
Listen to this articleDistrict Court did not err in granting summary judgment on malicious prosecution claim where defendant attorneys had a reasonable belief their claims could succeed on the merits and there was no evidence of malicious intent.
District Court did not err in dismissing vicarious liability claims against law firms where Minn. Stat. sec. 481.07 and Minn. Stat. sec. 481.071 did not provide independent causes of action.
District Court did not err in dismissing abuse of process claims because plaintiff could not show that defendants had an improper ulterior motive in attempting to shut down plaintiff’s allegedly defamatory website.
District Court did not abuse its discretion in denying motion to amend complaint to include a claim for punitive damages where there was no basis for punitive damages.
Affirmed.
A10-863 Gregerson v. Vilana Financial, Inc. (Hennepin County)
Top News
- Courtroom outbursts justified exclusion of mother from parental rights trial
- LGBTQ+ group sues over Iowa book, discussion bans
- Justices uphold business tax bill
- Court to weigh social media and First Amendment
- Federal court rules brokerage firm breached 1994 contract
- Court denies revocation of adoption
- UnitedHealth suit alleges faulty AI led to denied claims
- Judge asked to block part of a North Dakota abortion law
Expert Testimony
- Perspectives: Asylum appeals yield 3 denials for immigrants
- Quandaries & Quagmires: Risky business and tips for managing the risk
- Perspectives: JFK assassination: 60 years of litigation here
- Perspectives: Lincoln’s memorable address recalls impact here
