CBA made the same argument. In the alternative, Nemec requested that the district court clarify whether it granted summary judgment to Clark in February so that Nemec could appeal. The court ordered that judgment be entered nunc pro tunc pursuant to the February 1999 order. Nemec appeals the grant of summary judgment to Clark. We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the party against whom summary judgment was granted.
Many jurisdictions recognize that the doctrine of the law of the case has two distinct branches.
It is clear that the first branch of the doctrine of the law of the case has been adopted in Minnesota. Under the second branch of the doctrine of the law of the case, a district court may, in its discretion, decline to reconsider an issue previously decided by itself or a coordinate district court in the course of the same litigation. The purposes of the second branch of the doctrine are judicial economy and comity among coordinate district courts. We need not, however, decide that issue here. Nemec argues that the district court erred in granting summary judgment for Clark on Nemec's fraudulent-misrepresentation claim.