58 results for 'judge:"Tunheim"'.
J. Tunheim amends a previous order partially granting competing motions for summary judgment in a suit alleging that the sellers of several companies proceeded to steal those companies, and their customers, back from the purchaser along with employees and customers. An arbitrator's findings of fact are not preclusive, and summary judgment is granted to the sellers as to a breach-of-contract claim.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: October 2, 2023, Case #: 0:17cv5009, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Fraud, Contract
J. Tunheim denies the German substance-abuse treatment clinic's objection to a magistrate judge's order which found that the clinic's outside auditor, tax advisor and shareholder was a "managing agent," ordered that that agent and other officers, directors and managing agents be deposed in Minneapolis and granted narrowed motions to compel. The order did not rely upon any clear errors.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: 0:20cv409, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: International Law, Trademark, Discovery
J. Tunheim largely grants the Minnesota Sex Offender Program and its administrators' motion to dismiss the program detainees' suit alleging failures to transfer them to lower-security facilities. One procedural due process claim survives, but the detainees' other claims are dismissed with prejudice, and their request for damages is dismissed without prejudice. A motion to certify a class is also denied.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: September 28, 2023, Case #: 0:23cv486, NOS: Civil Detainee: Conditions of Confinement - Prisoner Petitions, Categories: Civil Rights, Class Action, Prisoners' Rights
J. Tunheim denies the meat packing companies' motion to dismiss multidistrict antitrust litigation alleging anticompetitive conduct in the pork packing industry to unlawfully stabilize the price of pork sold to grocery companies and others. The grocery companies sufficiently alleged a conspiracy to restrict competition in the industry which would impact the prices paid for pork for use in multi-ingredient pork products and pork by-products. The grocery companies' claims are timely even though the action was filed 10 years after the conspiracy allegedly began. The grocery companies alleged specific acts committed by the meat companies for the purpose of fraudulently concealing a conspiracy such that the statute of limitations is tolled. The grocery companies also adequately alleged that they were injured by the meat companies' violation of the Packers and Stockyards Act.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: September 26, 2023, Case #: 0:18cv1776, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: Antitrust
J. Tunheim rules in favor of the mother and son in the amount of $107,000 in an action under the Federal Tort Claims Act against the government arising after they were injured in a collision with a postal service truck. The mother and son showed that the truck driver failed to exercise ordinary care and that his breach of the duty of care proximately caused the wreck. However, a third party driver is 65% at fault for the collision due to his failure to secure a ladder to a van. The postal truck driver is 35% at fault and the government is therefore only liable for 35% of the total damages award for the mother's and son's medical expenses, property damages and other damages.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: September 26, 2023, Case #: 0:21cv1747, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Damages, Negligence
Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for Free
J. Tunheim denies the insurers' three motions to exclude expert testimony along with the insureds' two such motions, with the exception of a request by the insureds to strike two errata sheet changes by one of the experts. Cross-motions for partial and total summary judgment are partially granted. The experts' testimonies are variously appropriate to their proposed functions. Billing limitation agreements the insurers entered with healthcare providers are prohibited under the No-Fault Act as preestablished limitations and for having the effect of managed care. The insurer is therefore enjoined from entering or enforcing those or similar agreements. The insureds' breach of contract claims fail, however, since they have failed to prove that their policies guaranteed them their choice of providers. Issues of fact remain as to the insurers' involvement in challenged policies, so one insurer's request to dismiss all of its claims against an affiliated company that is not an insurer is denied, but another such company which has not issued any auto insurance policies in Minnesota during the class period of this suit is dismissed from this action.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: September 13, 2023, Case #: 0:19cv3071, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, Class Action, Contract
J. Tunheim dismisses the would-be employee's suit alleging that the employer failed to hire her on the basis of race, color, sex, sexual orientation and national origin. The national origin claim has not been administratively exhausted, and the would-be employee has not plausibly alleged discrimination nor that she was qualified for the employer's open positions.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: September 13, 2023, Case #: 0:23cv906, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Employment, Employment Discrimination
J. Tunheim grants the taco restaurant chain's partial motion for summary judgment and denies its competitor's motion for summary judgment in a suit brought by the chain alleging trademark infringement, partially grants the chain's motion to exclude expert testimony and denies its motion to strike the competitor's reply memorandum to the motion for summary judgment. The expert is arguably an expert on traditional Mexican cuisine and its distinctions from Tex-Mex cuisine, and therefore may testify on those topics. She may not testify as to whether consumers may prefer one over the other or whether they may confuse the two cuisines. The competitor's abuse of process counterclaim, which alleges that this suit was brought with the ulterior motive of intimidating and embarrassing the competitor, is dismissed for lack of evidence demonstrating the existence of such a motive. The chain's trademark claims also survive summary judgment, since the chain's mark is strong, the chain has introduced evidence of confusion and a jury could find that the marks and products offered are similar, that this similarity was intentional, that ordinary consumers are likely to buy the competitor's food believing that it was the chain's, and that the competitor's use of the disputed marks could dilute the chain's marks.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: September 6, 2023, Case #: 0:23cv, NOS: Trademark - Property Rights, Categories: Trademark, Experts
J. Tunheim grants summary judgment to the patent claimant in its suit alleging that the patent defendant's firewood processing attachment for a skid steer loader infringes on the claimant's patent. The accused product falls within the limitations of all of the claimant's asserted patent claims, and the claimant has therefore proved literal infringement. The patent is also not rendered obvious by prior art identified by the patent defendant, since the defendant has not shown that the combination of the elements discussed in the prior art was obvious. The claimant's claims are also not barred by estoppel or waiver, nor by prior litigation related to a pivotally mounted loading apparatus since this patent concerns a rigidly mounted apparatus. Finally, the defendant has not shown that this case is exceptional or has been litigated in an unreasonable manner.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: August 25, 2023, Case #: 0:20cv801, NOS: Patent - Property Rights, Categories: Patent
J. Tunheim denies the dust remover manufacturer's motion for summary judgment in the husband's suit against it alleging that a man who struck and killed his wife in a car collision was impaired after using the manufacturer's product as an inhalant. A reasonable factfinder could find that such misuse of the dust remover by drivers was foreseeable, and therefore that the manufacturer owed a duty to the deceased wife to take greater efforts to prevent such misuse. Similarly, a jury could reasonably find that the manufacturer's actions were a proximate cause for the wife's death, and material fact issues remain regarding failure-to-warn and design defect claims. Cross-motions to exclude expert testimony are both partially granted.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: August 25, 2023, Case #: 0:20cv1499, NOS: Personal Injury - Product Liability - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Negligence, Product Liability, Experts
J. Tunheim grants the beef packers' motion to dismiss the ranchers' complaint in this putative class action alleging price-fixing in cattle markets. The ranchers have not established antitrust standing for the purposes of their Sherman Act and Packers and Stockyards Act claims, nor for relevant state antitrust and consumer protection claims. The ranchers have not clearly explained how the alleged price-fixing scheme injured them.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: August 17, 2023, Case #: 0:22cv2903, NOS: Antitrust - Other Suits, Categories: Antitrust, Jurisdiction, Class Action
J. Tunheim denies the insurer's motion for certification of an interlocutory appeal of his finding that the insured adequately pled a Minnesota Consumer Fraud Act violation. The insurer has failed to show that the order it is appealing involves a controlling question of law or that there are substantial grounds for a difference of opinion, but proceedings will be stayed pending the resolution of a separate, existing appeal.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: August 7, 2023, Case #: 0:22cv970, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Fraud, Insurance
J. Tunheim grants the healthcare employers' motion to dismiss the employees' suits against them alleging that their terminations for refusal to comply with Covid-19 vaccination policies were religiously discriminatory. Two employees' claims are time-barred and were not administratively exhausted. Another has failed to allege how weekly testing requirements conflicted with her religious beliefs, and two more have not adequately pleaded sincerely held religious, rather than medical, beliefs in opposition to the employer's policy. Failure to accommodate is not a cognizable claim under the Minnesota Human Rights Act, so those claims are also dismissed, and Americans with Disability Act claims are administratively exhausted or failed to allege a disability.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: August 4, 2023, Case #: 0:22cv1427, NOS: Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, Employment Discrimination
J. Tunheim grants conditional certification to the employees' Fair Labor Standards Act class, finding that despite the relatively low number of class members and declarations alleging violations of overtime pay, the employees have adequately shown that they are similarly situated to the proposed class and that there is potential interest from other putative class members. The employees' motion for equitable tolling is also granted in light of a number of delays caused by negotiations between the parties.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: August 3, 2023, Case #: 0:21cv1796, NOS: Fair Labor Standards Act - Labor, Categories: Employment, Class Action
J. Tunheim denies the insureds' motion to dismiss their insurer's declaratory judgment case against them. This court has jurisdiction over the insurer's claims, and there is no parallel state court action to defer to since the underlying action for which the insurer seeks not to indemnify its insureds is not a parallel action. The declaratory judgment action could bring relief from uncertainty and insecurity to the parties, federal concerns are not implicated in this case, and the insurer's action does not appear to be an effort to influence the underlying action.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: August 2, 2023, Case #: 0:22cv2258, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, Jurisdiction
J. Tunheim partially grants the farmers' motion for attorneys' fees and costs in their suit against the Department of Agriculture in their successful suit for revenue insurance coverage for kidney bean prices. The farmers are eligible for fees as the prevailing party and the administration's pre-litigation and litigation positions were not substantially justified, but the attorneys' requested $350 hourly rate is somewhat higher than appropriate and is reduced to $325. The award is also reduced by 20% to account for a fifth plaintiff who did not show eligibility, but no further.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: July 24, 2023, Case #: 0:18cv1574, NOS: Administrative Procedure Act/Review or Appeal of Agency Decision - Other Suits, Categories: Administrative Law, Attorney Fees
J. Tunheim grants the insured's motion for partial summary judgment in an insurance coverage dispute regarding damage to concrete press pads in its subsidiary's printing facility. Earth movement caused in part by faulty workmanship or settling is covered by earth movement coverage extensions in the insurance policies at issue, which are ambiguous by way of unclear intent to create an anti-concurrent causation clause.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: July 18, 2023, Case #: 0:22cv1151, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Construction, Insurance
J. Tunheim partially grants the business purchaser's motion to confirm an arbitration award, for recovery of costs and attorney's fees and to correct a technical error in the arbitration award. The arbitrator did not err by determining that the purchaser did not breach the businesses' former owner's employment agreement by failing to pay him a contractually promised salary upon termination, nor by failing to hear evidence related to a fraudulent-inducement argument. The award is therefore confirmed, but the purchaser's proposed modifications are not. The former owner's fraudulent-inducement counterclaim cannot succeed, so a stay on it is lifted and it is dismissed. The purchaser's request to expand the scope of its summary judgment to include admissions made in an answer in related Illinois litigation is denied.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: June 28, 2023, Case #: 0:17cv5009, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Arbitration, Fraud, Contract
J. Tunheim denies the firearm retailers' motion to dismiss the state's suit against them alleging that they sold firearms to individuals that they knew or should have known were "straw purchasers" buying guns for people who could not legally do so themselves, but also denies the state's motion to remand the case to state court. The state's reliance on federal laws, regulations and guidance in its complaint is sufficient to raise a federal issue despite including only state-law causes of action. Its complaint is also not preempted by the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act, and its claims are plausibly alleged.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: June 27, 2023, Case #: 0:22cv2694, NOS: Other Personal Injury - Torts - Personal Injury, Categories: Preemption, Jurisdiction, Firearms
J. Tunheim denies the toymaker, its principal and its successors' motion to dismiss the sports equipment seller's suit against them alleging that they engaged in a series of fraudulent transfers to avoid paying a judgment. Contrary to the toymaker and related entities' assertions, the sale of the majority of the sports equipment seller's assets to another party did not include its claims against the toymaker, so the sports equipment seller owns the judgment at issue and has plausibly alleged injury.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: June 27, 2023, Case #: 0:19cv763, NOS: Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) - Other Suits, Categories: Enforcement Of Judgments, Racketeering
J. Tunheim denies the electronics conglomerate's motion for judgment as a matter of law and grants the MRI technology licensor's motion to amend its judgment against the conglomerate to include pre- and post-judgment interest. The conglomerate made "clear and definite promises" to the licensor when it purchased its assets and promised to move forward with the licensor's technology, so it is not entitled to judgment as a matter of law on the licensor's promissory estoppel claim. The licensor's calculation of prejudgment interest is too generous, since the conglomerate's $10 million verbal settlement offer does not supersede the legal effect of an earlier, smaller written offer, which was the definite monetary offer. Daily post-judgment interest is granted at $851.60 per day.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: June 27, 2023, Case #: 0:17cv1048, NOS: Other Contract - Contract, Categories: Settlements, Contract
J. Tunheim awards $43,283 of the consumer's requested $50,000 in attorney fees following a judgment in her favor in her suit against the creditor and credit reporting company alleging that they continued reporting a debt after a conciliation court judge found that the creditor had failed to show that it owned the subject account. The consumer's attorney's requested rate is unreasonably high, but only by $30, not the $65 difference requested by the creditor. Small adjustments in counsel's requested hours are also made.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: June 1, 2023, Case #: 0:22cv86, NOS: Consumer Credit - Other Suits, Categories: Debt Collection, Consumer Law, Attorney Fees
J. Tunheim reinstates attorney's fees and costs previously awarded to the students in their class-action suit against the university, and awards an additional $609,011.45 in attorneys' fees and costs for a total of $1,780,454.35. The students remained the prevailing party in this litigation after the Eight Circuit vacated an injunction, since they still prevailed on their treatment and benefits claim on remand. Their request for post-judgment fees is also largely reasonable.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: May 30, 2023, Case #: 0:16cv1115, NOS: Other Civil Rights - Civil Rights, Categories: Education, Attorney Fees
J. Tunheim grants summary judgment to the employer in the employee's suit alleging that it failed to accommodate her disability, namely narcolepsy, and retaliated against her for seeking accommodations. The employer's refusal to allow the employee to "flex" her time was not a failure to accommodate because the employee did not request the greater flexibility in start times she says she did not receive. It also did not constitute retaliation, nor do the denial of requests for training or her resignation.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: May 26, 2023, Case #: 0:20cv1511, NOS: Amer w/Disabilities-Employment - Civil Rights, Categories: Ada / Rehabilitation Act, Employment, Employment Retaliation
J. Tunheim denies the insurer's motion in its declaratory-judgment case against its insured to amend his partial summary judgment order to certify it for an interlocutory appeal. There is not substantial ground for a difference of opinion on how many deductibles the insured is responsible for, and the insurer has not shown that an appeal would materially advance the termination of litigation.
Court: USDC Minnesota, Judge: Tunheim, Filed On: May 26, 2023, Case #: 0:21cv2093, NOS: Insurance - Contract, Categories: Insurance, Contract