Preview:

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A09-1172 Pond Hollow Homeowners Association, Plaintiff, vs. The Ryland Group, Inc., a Maryland corporation, defendant and third party plaintiff, Respondent, vs. Stock Building Supply, Inc. d/b/a Barnabo Builders, a North Carolina corporation, et al., Third Party Defendants, and Automated Building Components, Inc., Fourth Party Plaintiff, vs. Reliant Building Products, Inc., a Florida corporation, et al., Fourth Party Defendants, and D. S. M. Excavating Company, Inc., Third Party Defendant and Fourth Party Plaintiff, vs. Braun Intertec Corporation, Fourth Party Defendant, Pioneer Engineering, P. A., fourth party defendant, Appellant.

Filed March 30, 2010 Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded Hudson, Judge Hennepin County District Court File No. 27-CV-07-4599 Karl E. Robinson, Kurt M. Mitchell, Hellmuth & Johnson, PLLC, Eden Prairie, Minnesota (for respondent) Katherine A. McBride, Michael D. Hutchens, Lenae M. Pederson, Meagher & Geer, P.L.L.P., Minneapolis, Minnesota (for appellant) Considered and decided by Hudson, Presiding Judge; Connolly, Judge; and Johnson, Judge. SYLLABUS After granting summary judgment against a claimant on the merits of a claim, a district court may not dismiss the claim without prejudice but, rather, must enter judgment in favor of the moving party. OPINION HUDSON, Judge On appeal from summary judgment in its favor, appellant contends that the district court erred by dismissing respondent's claims without prejudice. By notice of review, respondent challenges the grant of summary judgment on its professional-negligence claim. Because respondent has failed to establish a prima facie case of professional negligence, we affirm in part. But because the district court erred by dismissing

respondent's claims without prejudice, we reverse in part and remand so that judgment may be entered dismissing respondent's claims with prejudice. 2

FACTS This appeal involves alleged construction and design defects in a group of homes. The real property at issue was purchased by Janco Inc. (Janco) in May 1998. Janco hired appellant Pioneer Engineering P.A. (Pioneer) to design, engineer, and survey the site where the homes were to be built. Janco assigned its interest in the real property to respondent The Ryland Group Inc. (Ryland) in September 1998. Ryland was the

developer of and general contractor for the homes, which were built between 1998 and 2000. The homes are now owned by members of the Pond Hollow Homeowners

Association (the association). In October 2005, the association sued Ryland for breach of statutory warranties, breach of contract, negligence, and breach of fiduciary duty. Among other things, the association alleged defects in the homes related to water-table levels or drainage. In July 2008, Ryland filed an amended third-party complaint against Pioneer, alleging that the problems with the homes were caused by Pioneer's negligence. Ryland also claimed that it was entitled to "contribution and/or indemnification" from Pioneer if Ryland were found to be liable to the association. In October 2008, Pioneer moved for summary judgment against Ryland. The district court granted Pioneer's motion, concluding that no genuine issues of material fact existed. The district court noted: Ryland's action against Pioneer is one for indemnity and contribution. The motion for summary judgment is granted without prejudice because of the separate Janco

3

litigation,[1] the relationship between Ryland and Janco which has not yet been adjudicated, and to preserve arguments and claims that Ryland might have after a full trial in this case. This appeal follows. ISSUES I. Did the district court err by granting Pioneer's motion for summary

judgment on Ryland's negligent-engineering claim? II. Did the district court err by dismissing Ryland's claims without prejudice? ANALYSIS On appeal from summary judgment, we review de novo whether there are any genuine issues of material fact and whether the district court erred in its application of the law. STAR Ctrs., Inc. v. Faegre & Benson, L.L.P., 644 N.W.2d 72, 76

Download A09-1172, Pond Hollow Homeowners Association, Plaintiff, vs. The Ryland Group, I

Minnesota Law