Daniel P. Doda
Supreme Court of the United States
Sveen v. Melin, 138 S. Ct. 1815 (2018). Daniel Doda successfully represented the children of the decedent before the Supreme Court of the United States, which held that the retroactive application of Minnesota’s revocation-on-divorce statute, Minnesota Statute Section 524.2-804, that automatically revokes a former spouse as a beneficiary designation on a life insurance policy does not violate the Contracts Clause of the United States Constitution. The Court’s decision allowed Mr. Doda’s clients to receive the decedent’s life insurance proceeds rather than the decedent’s former spouse.
United States Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit
Metropolitan Life Ins. Co. v. Melin, 899 F.3d 953 (8th Cir. 2018). Affirmed the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota’s grant of summary judgment awarding life insurance policy proceeds to our clients.
United States District Court for the District of Minnesota
Meseck v. Tak Communications, Inc., 2011 WL 1190579 (D. Minn., March 28, 2011). Successfully obtained conditional class certification for our clients, consisting of 107 class members, for failure to pay overtime wages to cable installation technicians under the Fair Labor Standards Act. Consequently, the case resolved with a favorable settlement for our clients.
Minnesota
T&R Flooring, LLC v. O’Byrne, 826 N.W.2d 833 (Minn. Ct. App. 2013). Daniel Doda successfully represented two mechanic’s lien claimants in obtaining a dismissal of the property owner’s interlocutory appeal of a partial judgment.
Gates v. Macken, 2016 WL 2615873 (Minn. Ct. App., May 9, 2016). Daniel Doda successfully represented defendants husband and wife in an appeal of summary judgment granted in favor of the plaintiff on his claim that the husband and wife were unjustly enriched when proceeds from the sale of land were used to pay off a loan to the husband’s plumbing corporation. The Court dismissed the wife from the action and reversed the district court’s judgment against the husband because the plaintiff could not establish the factors necessary to pierce the veil of the husband’s plumbing corporation.
T&R Flooring, LLC v. O’Byrne, 2015 WL 4528693 (Minn. Ct. App., September 29, 2015). Daniel Doda successfully obtained summary judgment for two mechanic’s lien claimants in district court. On appeal, the Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed summary judgment in favor of our clients that they had valid enforceable mechanic’s liens because they were exempt from giving pre-lien notice under Minnesota Statute Section 514.011, Subd. 4a, their liens had priority over the lender, and the property owner’s counterclaims for breach of contract and slander of title were properly dismissed.
Tonna Mech., Inc., v. Double Al, LLC, 2011 WL 2437387 (Minn. Ct. App., June 20, 2011). Daniel Doda successfully represented a mechanic’s lien claimant on the foreclosure of its lien in district court and the appellate court. The Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed the district court’s judgment in favor of our client, holding that the our client properly billed for its work on a time and material basis and that it was not required to give pre-lien notice because the improved property consisted of commercial property with more than 5,000 total usable square feet of floor space under Section 514.011, Subd. 4c.
District Court File No.: 85-CV-11-128 (2014). Daniel Doda represented a contractor in a jury trial and obtained a verdict for damages in favor of our client on its breach of contract claim.
District Court File No.: 55-PR-19-3052 (2019). Daniel Doda successfully represented the surviving wife in the deceased husband’s probate estate seeking to invalidate the antenuptial agreement entered nearly 30 years ago so the surviving wife could receive the spousal elective share of the augmented estate under the Minnesota Uniform Probate Code.
District Court File No.: 79-PR-19-1088 (2019). Daniel Doda successfully represented the personal representative against a claim brought by a putative child seeking to access the decedent’s DNA to determine heirship under the Minnesota Uniform Probate Code. The Court dismissed the putative child’s claim in favor of our client.