Retail Practice

Lind, Jensen, Sullivan & Peterson, P.A. has a long history of representing retail clients in areas including:

Premises liability
Products liability
Fraud/Embezzlement
Employment law
Regulatory law
Security issues

Retail businesses are unique and when our firm was founded, we believed it was important to provide these businesses with advocates who were willing to defend them zealously, especially because retail businesses are typically portrayed as non-sympathetic. Representing retail businesses requires an understanding of the different challenges retailers face - an understanding our firm's attorneys have developed. Our continued goal has been to educate those in the court system that retail businesses are the lifeblood of the community, providing jobs, revenue and leaders. Over the years, we have refined and developed our firm to provide additional services to better assist the retail community with its needs. We believe it is important to provide good solutions - fast.

Cases

Jean Bruns v. Pioneer Enterprises, et al., (C8-02-2085) (Minn. Ct. App. 2003)
Slip and fall case dismissed on summary judgment because landowner neither knew, nor had reason to know of the dangerous condition upon which plaintiff slipped. Court of Appeals upheld the dismissal.

Deana Zapata v. Walgreen Company and John Doe Store Manager, 2009 WL 3644897, Civ. No. 08-5416 (RHK/FLN)(Dist. Minn. 2009).
Summary judgment dismissing claims by the plaintiff that Walgreen’s sold a defective product that allegedly caused personal injury to the plaintiff.

Jerry Abbott v Target Corporation, (Henn. Co. Court File No.: 27-CV-09-21969).
Case dismissed based on argument that California law applied despite case being brought in Minnesota. After California law was applied, cased was dismissed as barred by the California statute of limitations.

Larry D. Pinson v. Grazzini Brothers & Company, (A03-1567) (Minn. Ct. App. 2004). Court of Appeals upholds summary judgment in an employment case where employee sued claiming discriminatory discharge because employee’s evidence was insufficient to allow case to go to trial.

Craig Johanns, et al., Respondents v. Minnesota Mobile Storage Inc., (A07-903) (Minn. Ct. App. 2008).
Case involving retailer’s rights when customer fails to pay for service.

Andre Gilmore v. Walgreen Co., 759 N.W.2d 433 (Minn. Ct. App. 2009).
Case involving retailers’ liability for patron falling over pallet and retailers’ duty to anticipate customer injuries.

Brittany Deleon, et al. v. Target Corporation, (A09-1640) (Minn. Ct. App. 2010).
Slip and fall case currently before Minnesota Supreme Court. Case was dismissed on summary judgment because the district court found Target had no duty to warn plaintiff of a puddle because Target did not know of the puddle. Court of Appeals upheld dismissal of claim against Target.

Graham Waltz, et al., Appellants, vs. Life Time Fitness, Inc., (A09-2040) (Minn. Ct. App. 2010).
Court of appeals upheld summary judgment based on exculpatory clause in a membership agreement, dismissing member of the fitness club’s claim against the club for negligence based on an injury member sustain in the club.