Negligent Misrepresentation – Duty of Care

The University of Minnesota and Orlando Henry “Tubby” Smith argued that the District Court: (1) erred by denying their motion for judgment as a matter of law; (2) abused its discretion by denying their motion for a new trial; (3) lacked jurisdiction over the case presented at trial by James R. Williams; and (4) abused its discretion by declining to remit the jury’s damage award. On cross-appeal, Williams also challenged the District Court’s remittitur decision. Williams was an assistant men’s basketball coach at Oklahoma State University. Smith contacted Williams about a position at the University of Minnesota. After negotiations, Smith called Williams and offered him an assistant-coach position at Minnesota. Williams accepted the offer. Later, Smith’s boss was informed that Williams’s previous major violations twice placed the university on probationary status with the NCAA, serious penalties which the boss deemed to disqualify Williams for an assistant-coaching position at Minnesota. Williams sued Smith and the University for negligent misrepresentation and the jury returned a verdict in his favor. The Court of Appeals held that a duty of care exists in all instances when a party provides information for the guidance of others in the course of business or where there is a pecuniary interest. They concluded that Smith owed Williams a duty of care and breached that duty. Affirmed.

A10-1802, A11-0567 Williams v. Smith (Hennepin County)

Click for Full Text