Louise A. Behrendt

Practice Details

• Video Calls
  Offers Video Calls

  Video Call Options

  Zoom
  Skype
  
• Firm Information
  Position

  Senior Counsel

  Firm Name

  Meagher + Geer, P.L.L.P.
• Representative Cases & Transactions
  Cases

  Significant Cases: Domagala v. 3M Company, et al, Court File No. 62-CV-16-3232, in which the Ramsey County District Court granted summary judgment for firm client Carrier Corporation, in a living mesothelioma asbestos case with seven figure exposure. The court found that the repose provisions within Minn. Stat. 541.051, subd. 1 applied to bar claims based on alleged exposure to asbestos occurring during installation of furnaces more than fifty years before the lawsuit was commenced. This decision is a significant one, as application of Minnesota's repose provisions to asbestos injury cases has rarely been recognized
  applied by the Minnesota asbestos trial courts.
  Cody Slieter v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company, 868 N.W. 2d 21 (Minn. 2015), in which the Minnesota Supreme Court concluded that plaintiff, one of several individuals injured in a accident in which several students were injured on a school bus, is entitled to excess underinsured motorist coverage under Minn. Stat. 65B.49, subd. 3a (5)
  the court found the statute ambiguous,
  concluded that the better interpretation of the phrase coverage available was the one which provided plaintiff with a UIM recovery if the coverage available to him under his own auto policy did not exceed the total amount actually available to him via a pro rata distribution from the UIM coverage on the occupied vehicle.
  Hanbury v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company, 865 N.W. 2d 83 (Minn. Ct App. 2015), in which the Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that an individual who receives allegedly insufficient wrongful death damages from the auto-related death of his parent is not entitled to UIM coverage under his own auto policy.
  Rosso v. Hallmark Homes of Minneapolis , 843 N.W. 2d 798 (Minn. Ct. App. 2014), in which the Court of Appeals construed the meaning of the term substantial completion with reference to the ten-year statute of repose applicable to construction defect claims in Minn. Stat. 541.051, subd. 1.
  Engineering
  Construction Innovations, Inc. v. L.H. Bolduc Co., Inc., 825 N.W. 2d 695 (Minn. 2013), in which the Minnesota Supreme Court addressed important issues regarding indemnification obligations in construction contracts.
  Day Masonry v. ISD 347 , 781 N.W. 2d 321 (Minn. 2010), in which the Court addressed the procedural requirements involved in filing a notice of review as an appellant
  refined the considerations involved in applying the statute of limitations for construction defect claims.
  Carlson v. Allstate Ins Co., 749 N.W. 2d 41 (Minn. 2008), in which the Court clarified its position on the reasonable expectations doctrine when construing insurance policies.
  Mumm v. Mornson , 708 N.W. 2d 475 (Minn. 2006), an important case involving governmental immunity in which the Court found for the first time that police officers could be held liable for failing to follow established policy in conducting a vehicular pursuit that result in injury or death to byst
  ers.
  Community Contributions: Attorney Volunteer, Wills for Heroes, Minnesota State Bar Association
  Leadership Experience: Adjunct Professor, Appellate Advocacy, Mitchell Hamline School of Law (Fall 2017)
• Additional Links
  http://www.meagher.com/professionals/xprProfessionalDetailsMeagher.aspx?xpST=ProfessionalDetail&professional=183