UPDATE: This week, the Minnesota Supreme Court granted petitions for review of 35W Bridge-related cases (appellate decisions here and here).
Original Post, 8/24/2010: One of the primary targets of the 35W bridge collapse victims’ cases, URS Corp., sought to “give credit where credit is due,” meaning that it hoped that it might get contribution from Jacobs Engineering, the successor entity to Sverdrup & Parcel, which allegedly improperly designed the bridge in the 1960’s. (URS’ blaming the original bridge design for the collapse was, of course, self-serving, but there was strong evidence that it was also correct.)
The “statute of repose” insulated Jacobs Engineering from any direct claims by the victims. URS argued, however, that it should still be able to make a contribution claim, even if direct claims were barred. This position survived a motion to dismiss before Hennepin County District Court Judge Deborah Hedlund, but it did not survive the Minnesota Court of Appeals (Peterson, Lansing, Stauber, in a decision written by Judge Peterson). (Jacobs Engineering did not fare so well, however, in defending against the Minnesota’s claim against it for indemnification, also decided this week by the Minnesota Court of Appeals.)