Notable Opinions: Week of May 11, 2026

The Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed summary judgment against a dental-malpractice plaintiff, finding the district court abused its discretion. The court held the plaintiff’s expert affidavit met Minn. Stat. § 145.682 by adequately explaining causation, linking incomplete tooth extraction to retained fragments that caused infection and osteomyelitis, particularly given the plaintiff’s diabetes. It also ruled the district court improperly required the expert to eliminate alternative causes at the prima facie stage. Additionally, excluding the expert under Rule 702 was erroneous, as the expert was qualified. Weaknesses in the expert’s opinions were deemed issues for cross-examination, not admissibility. The case was remanded.

Gerrety v. Bogdanowicz, Court of Appeals

Administration of Medication

Petitioner county sought a writ of prohibition to prevent enforcement of a district court order requiring the county to pay attorney fees for privately appointed counsel representing a criminal defendant in proceedings concerning involuntary administration of neuroleptic medication under Minn. Stat. § 611.47. The Court of Appeals held that an order requiring a county to pay attorney fees arising from the state’s motion under Minn. Stat. § 611.47, subd. 1, is independently appealable under Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 103.03(g). Because an adequate appellate remedy existed, the extraordinary remedy of prohibition was unavailable. Writ denied.

State v. Bader, Court of Appeals

Insurance

Plaintiff appealed the adverse judgment in her ERISA action against defendant. Plaintiff filed an accidental death and dismemberment benefits claim under her husband’s ERISA plan after he passed away. Defendant, the plan administrator, denied the claim after finding that the death was not caused solely by an accident but rather that plaintiff’s husband’s blood thinner medication contributed to his death. Where plaintiff failed to contradict defendant’s evidence that her husband’s blood thinner medication contributed to him developing a fatal hematoma, defendants reasonably denied plaintiff’s claim based on its determination that the accident was not the sole cause of plaintiff’s husband’s death. Judgment is affirmed.

Beard v. Lincoln National Life Insurance Company, 8th Circuit

See all of the week’s Opinion Digests for the Minnesota Supreme Court, Court of Appeals and the 8th Circuit here.