Staab v. Cloud

4 Citing cases

  1. Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud

    813 N.W.2d 68 (Minn. 2012)   Cited 112 times
    Adopting a technical definition when doing so is consistent with the statutory context

    The Diocese appealed, and the court of appeals reversed. Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud, 780 N.W.2d 392, 396 (Minn.App.2010). The court observed that “the statute is not a model of clarity,” but concluded that requiring the Diocese to pay 100% of the damages award “does not comport with the plain language” of subdivision 1.

  2. Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud

    853 N.W.2d 713 (Minn. 2014)   Cited 66 times
    Stating that we cannot add words to a statute that is "silent on the issue in question"

    Section 604.02 as passed consisted of three subdivisions.Staab I was the first court of appeals decision in this case, 780 N.W.2d 392 (Minn.App.2010). Staab II was this court's decision affirming and modifying Staab I. Staab III was the court of appeals decision after subsequent proceedings, 830 N.W.2d 40 (Minn.App.2013), which the court reverses today in what will be known as Staab IV.

  3. Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud

    830 N.W.2d 40 (Minn. Ct. App. 2013)   Cited 2 times
    In Staab, for example, a jury had awarded fifty-percent of the fault to Richard Staab, who was not a party to the litigation, and fifty-percent to the diocese.

    The diocese appealed, and we reversed. See Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud, 780 N.W.2d 392 (Minn.App.2010)( Staab I ). The Minnesota Supreme Court granted review and affirmed our decision. See Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud, 813 N.W.2d 68 (Minn.

  4. Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud

    A12-1575 (Minn. Ct. App. Apr. 29, 2013)

    The diocese appealed, and we reversed. See Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud, 780 N.W.2d 392 (Minn. App. 2010) (Staab I). The Minnesota Supreme Court granted review and affirmed our decision. See Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud, 813 N.W.2d 68 (Minn.