Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility

02-0022 Laska v. Laska

By: dmc-admin//May 6, 2002//

02-0022 Laska v. Laska

By: dmc-admin//May 6, 2002//

Listen to this article

“Although the signature need not be handwritten, the term ‘subscribed’ cannot be read to dispense altogether with a written indication of assent. To give such an expansive meaning to the term would frustrate the purpose of the statute, which is to give certainty to what was agreed upon.”

Accordingly, because the statute does not provide for a party to “subscribe” to an agreement through general conduct, defendant is not bound by the mediation agreement which she did not sign.

Reversed and remanded.

Recommended for publication in the official reports.

Dist III, St. Croix County, Lunden, J., Cane, C.J.

Attorneys:

For Appellant: Rodney J. Mason, St. Paul, Minn.

For Respondent: Rolf E. Gilbertson, Minneapolis, Minn; Joel D. Porter, Hudson; R. Michael Waterman, Hudson

Polls

Should Steven Avery be granted a new evidentiary hearing?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Legal News

See All Legal News

WLJ People

Sea all WLJ People

Opinion Digests