Case Name: LAKE CITY APARTMENTS, Appellant, v. LUND-MARTIN CO., et al., Respondents, Miller Hanson Westerbeck Bell Architects, Inc., et al., Defendants; and MILLER HANSON WESTERBECK BELL ARCHITECTS, INC., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, v. LUNDQUIST, WILMAR, SCHULTZ AND MARTIN, INC., etc., Third-Party Defendants; and LUND-MARTIN CO., et al., Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. SWANSON PLUMBING & HEATING, INC., et al., Third-Party Defendants
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Minnesota
Decision Date: 1988-03-21
Citations: 421 N.W.2d 302
Docket Number: No. C9-87-1462
Parties: LAKE CITY APARTMENTS, Appellant, v. LUND-MARTIN CO., et al., Respondents, Miller Hanson Westerbeck Bell Architects, Inc., et al., Defendants. and MILLER HANSON WESTERBECK BELL ARCHITECTS, INC., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, v. LUNDQUIST, WILMAR, SCHULTZ AND MARTIN, INC., etc., Third-Party Defendants. and LUND-MARTIN CO., et al., Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. SWANSON PLUMBING & HEATING, INC., et al., Third-Party Defendants.
Judges: 
Reporter: North Western Reporter 2d
Volume: 421
Pages: 302–303

Head Matter:
LAKE CITY APARTMENTS, Appellant, v. LUND-MARTIN CO., et al., Respondents, Miller Hanson Westerbeck Bell Architects, Inc., et al., Defendants. and MILLER HANSON WESTERBECK BELL ARCHITECTS, INC., Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff, v. LUNDQUIST, WILMAR, SCHULTZ AND MARTIN, INC., etc., Third-Party Defendants. and LUND-MARTIN CO., et al., Third-Party Plaintiffs, v. SWANSON PLUMBING & HEATING, INC., et al., Third-Party Defendants.
No. C9-87-1462.
Supreme Court of Minnesota.
March 21, 1988.

Opinion:
ORDER
Based upon all the files, records and proceedings herein,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Swanson Plumbing & Heating, Inc.'s motion to accept its petition for further review be, and the same is, granted.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the petitions of Lund-Martin Company and St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company and Swanson Plumbing & Heating, Inc. for further review be, and the same are granted for the limited purpose of remanding to the court of appeals for reconsideration in light of this court's decision in Wittmer v. Rugemer d.b.a. Norco Construction, 419 N.W.2d 493 (Minn.1988).