Terwilliger v. Hennepin County

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• stating that in reviewing the exception under section 466.03, subdivision 6, the court will be guided by the decisions under section 3.376, subdivision 3(b)
• noting that discretionary-act immunity does not apply to “ [operational level decisions . . . [that] involve decisions relating to the ordinary day-to-day operations of the government”
• noting that “day-to-day [medical] treatment decisions — despite the professional discretion involved in their making — are operational decisions that do not ordinarily fall within [discretionary-act] immunity”
• observing that “the legislature did not intend the discretionary function exception to swallow the general rule of allowing recovery for those injuries negligently inflicted in the performance of government operations”
• observing that, in Cairl, court was concerned with youth’s mental illness and public safety
• observing that, in Cairl, court was concerned with youth's mental illness and public safety

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).