Case Citator › Kuha v. City of Minnetonka

Kuha v. City of Minnetonka

Is it still good law? What later courts have actually done to this case.

Overruled in part
Court
Eighth Circuit
Citation
365 F.3d 590
Decided
Confirmed treatments
1
Flagged citations read
43 of 43
Citing cases (total)
43
Treatment dates
2007
Overruled in part
A reviewed court has overruled part of this case’s holding. Kuha v. City of Minnetonka was overruled in part; all 43 flagged citations have been read. The Eighth Circuit, sitting en banc in Szabla v. City of Brooklyn Park, abandoned Kuha’s municipal liability analysis in Part II.C as circuit precedent.
More on how this was screened

Its separate Fourth Amendment analysis of police dog warnings continued to be applied in later Eighth Circuit opinions. The confirmed treatment is listed below.

Every treatment on this page is written from the citing opinion itself, with a verbatim quote, never copied from a commercial citator. A citation flagged by our screen but not shown here was read and found not to weaken this case.

43 later cases cite Kuha v. City of Minnetonka; 43 of those citations sat close to treatment language and were flagged for reading, and all of them have been read. Citations that did not sit near treatment language were not flagged and were not read one by one, so a court that weakened this case without using any of that language would not appear here.

Relying on Kuha v. City of Minnetonka?

This page shows what later courts did to it. Ask about your specific facts and see whether it still carries your argument, with citations you can check.

Treatments

Overruled in part

  • The en banc Eighth Circuit abandoned Kuha’s municipal liability analysis in Part II.C as circuit precedent.

    Szabla v. City of Brooklyn Park · United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit (en banc) · filed

    We thus conclude that Szabla's reliance on Kuha is not persuasive, and his claim against Brooklyn Park fails as a matter of law for the reasons set forth above. Because aspects of the analysis in Kuha are inconsistent with our opinion today, and are likely to sow confusion if left undisturbed, we abandon Part II.C of our opinion in Kuha as circuit precedent.
    Read the full opinion on CourtListener →

Does this case still carry your argument?

Describe your facts. Ezel reads Kuha v. City of Minnetonka and the cases that treated it, then tells you whether it still holds for your situation, with citations.

Opens in Ezel Pro.

  • Checks the law as it stands today, not only this page
  • Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
  • Chat, drafting and research in one workspace