Civil lawyers know that interest can be substantial if the judgment is large enough.  This case suggests that interest accrues from the beginning of the case.  Also, it suggests that two offer different sources to cut off interest accrual exists in Minnesota, Rule 68 and Minn. Stat. 549.09.   STATE OF MINNESOTA IN DISTRICT COURT COUNTY OF DOUGLAS SEVENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT Dennis Larson, Court File No.: 21-CV-09-620 Plaintiff, v. Le Homme Dieu Cabin Rentals LLC, Roy Anderson, Nicholas Bormann, and Steven Bormann, Defendants. A jury trial in this matter was held before the Honorable David R. Battey on November 30, …

Aviva Sports, Inc., Plaintiff, v. Fingerhut Direct Marketing, Inc., Menard, Inc., Kmart Corporation, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., and Manley Toys, Ltd., Defendants. Civil No. 09-1091 (JNE/JSM).United States District Court, D. Minnesota. June 27, 2011. ORDER JOAN N. ERICKSEN, District Judge. Pending before the Court is Defendant Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.’s (Wal-Mart) motion for summary judgment on count three of the Amended Complaint, which alleges unfair competition in violation of the Lanham Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a) (2006). Wal-Mart argues that Plaintiff Aviva Sports, Inc. (Aviva) does not have standing to bring a Lanham Act false advertising claim against it. For the reasons …

Kenneth Tabish, Appellant, v. Target Corporation, Respondent, IMPACT Resource Group, Inc., an Ohio corporation, et al., Respondents, John Does I-X, Defendants No. A10-2129.Court of Appeals of Minnesota. Filed June 27, 2011. Considered and decided by Peterson, Presiding Judge; Minge, Judge; and Worke, Judge. UNPUBLISHED OPINION WORKE, Judge. Appellant challenges the district court’s grant of summary judgment on his negligence and strict-liability claims. We conclude that the district court appropriately granted summary judgment in favor of both respondents on appellant’s negligence claims. In granting summary judgment on appellant’s strict-liability claims, however, the district court abused its discretion by sanctioning appellant for …

Herbert A. Igbanugo, et al., Appellants, v. Mark A. Cangemi, Respondent. No. A10-2002.Court of Appeals of Minnesota. Filed June 27, 2011. Considered and decided by Halbrooks, Presiding Judge; Hudson, Judge; and Bjorkman, Judge. UNPUBLISHED OPINION HALBROOKS, Judge. Appellants challenge the district court’s dismissal of their complaint for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and contend that the district court abused its discretion by striking portions of the complaint and by refusing to accept appellants’ post-hearing brief. Because we conclude that the district court erred by dismissing appellants’ claim of breach of contract and implied covenant …

Kamboo Market, LLC, Appellant, v. Sherman Associates, Inc., defendant and third party plaintiff, Respondent, v. Abdirashid Jama, et al., third party defendants, Appellants. No. A10-1810.Court of Appeals of Minnesota. Filed June 27, 2011. Considered and decided by Wright, Presiding Judge; Kalitowski, Judge; and Larkin, Judge. UNPUBLISHED OPINION LARKIN, Judge. Appellant challenges the district court’s award of summary judgment in respondent’s favor, as well as the district court’s denial of its motion to amend its complaint. By notice of related appeal, respondent challenges the district court’s attorney-fee award and its denial of respondent’s motion for amended findings of fact and conclusions …

Tri State Grease & Tallow Company, Inc., d/b/a Origo, Respondent, v. BJB, LLC, d/b/a Agri Trading, Appellant. No. A10-1560.Court of Appeals of Minnesota. Filed June 27, 2011. Considered and decided by Toussaint, Presiding Judge; Klaphake, Judge; and Connolly, Judge. UNPUBLISHED OPINION TOUSSAINT, Judge. In this appeal from judgment following a jury trial in a breach-of-contract action, appellant BJB, LLC, d/b/a Agri Trading, challenges the denial of its motions for judgment as a matter of law, a new trial, or remittitur, arguing that (1) the evidence does not support the jury’s verdict; (2) opposing counsel improperly focused the jury’s attention on …

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A10-1907 Ironwood Springs Christian Ranch, Inc., Appellant, vs. Walk to Emmaus a/k/a Walk for Emmaus, Respondent. Filed June 27, 2011 Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded; motion granted  Schellhas, Judge Olmsted County District Court File No. 55-CV-09-7609       Considered and decided by Schellhas, Presiding Judge; Hudson, Judge; and Worke, Judge. S Y L L A B U S 1.         The liability of a person who undertakes another’s duty owed to a third person is governed by Restatement (Second) of Torts § 324A. 2.         To be liable under Restatement (Second) of …

Andre Haustein, Relator, v. City of St. Paul, Department of Safety and Inspections, Respondent. No. A10-1407.Court of Appeals of Minnesota. June 20, 2011.Andre Haustein, St. Paul, Minnesota, pro se relator. Sara R. Grewing, St. Paul City Attorney, Virginia D. Palmer, Assistant City Attorney, St. Paul, Minnesota, for respondent. Considered and decided by Toussaint, Presiding Judge; Connolly, Judge; and Willis, Judge.[*] UNPUBLISHED OPINION TOUSSAINT, Judge. Relator Andre Haustein challenges a hearing officer’s determination that his dog is a dangerous animal and that its destruction is warranted under the dangerous-animal ordinance of respondent City of St. Paul, Department of Safety and Inspections. …

Tonna Mechanical, Inc., Respondent, v. Double Al, LLC, et al., Appellants, John Doe, et al., Defendants. No. A10-1174.Court of Appeals of Minnesota. June 20, 2011.Considered and decided by Peterson, Presiding Judge; Worke, Judge; and Schellhas, Judge. UNPUBLISHED OPINION WORKE, Judge. Appellants challenge the district court’s: (1) finding that an agency relationship existed giving rise to apparent authority; (2) finding that an oral agreement existed; (3) failure to dismiss respondent’s lien for containing material misrepresentations; (4) failure to dismiss respondent’s lien for lack of a pre-lien notice; and (5) award of attorney’s fees. We affirm. DECISION Appellant Double Al, LLC., owner …

Icon Health & Fitness, Inc., a Delaware corporation, Plaintiff, v. Octane Fitness, LLC, a Minnesota limited liability company; and Nellie’s Exercise Equipment, Inc., a California corporation, Defendants. Civil No. 09-319 ADM/SRN.United States District Court, D. Minnesota.   MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER ANN D. MONTGOMERY, District Judge. I. INTRODUCTION On October 21, 2010, a Markman hearing was held before the undersigned United States District Judge in this patent infringement action by Plaintiff Icon Health & Fitness, Inc. (“Icon”) against Defendant Octane Fitness, LLC (“Octane”).[1] Icon alleges that Octane infringed claims 1-5, 7, and 9-11 of U.S. Patent No. 6,019,710 (the “’710 …