Gus A. Chafoulias, Appellant, vs. Lori C. Peterson, Respondent, American Broadcast Companies, Inc., a Delaware corp., Respondent.

Gus A. Chafoulias, Appellant, vs. Lori C. Peterson, Respondent, American Broadcast Companies, Inc., a Delaware corp., Respondent. C2-01-1617, Supreme Court Order, September 25, 2003.

STATE OF MINNESOTA

IN SUPREME COURT

C2-01-1617

 

Gus A. Chafoulias,
 

                                     Appellant,

 vs.

 
 

Lori C. Peterson,
 

                                     Respondent,

 

 

American Broadcast Companies, Inc.,
a Delaware corp.,
 

                                     Respondent.

 

 

ORDER ON REHEARING

            In an opinion filed August 14, 2003, we affirmed in part and reversed in part the decision of the court of appeals and remanded the issue of summary judgment for respondent Lori Peterson based on limited purpose public figure privilege to the district court for further proceedings. 

            Respondent Peterson has petitioned for rehearing, requesting that any remand first be made to the court of appeals to consider the alternative grounds for summary judgment presented by her to the district court and identified in her notice of review to the court of appeals.  Because the court of appeals affirmed the grant of summary judgment in favor of Peterson on the ground of the limited purpose public figure privilege, it did not address Peterson's alternative grounds for summary judgment.  Our reversal of summary judgment with respect to Peterson necessitates consideration of the alternative grounds raised, and accordingly our remand should be to the court of appeals to first address those issues preserved in Peterson's notice of review.

            Based upon all the files, records and proceedings herein,

            IT IS HEREBY ORDERED the petition for rehearing is granted, and, preliminary to the remand to the district court for determination of the applicability of the limited purpose public figure privilege, we first remand this matter to the court of appeals to determine the issues presented in Peterson's notice of review and briefed by the parties before the court of appeals.

            Dated:  September 17, 2003

                                                                                    BY THE COURT:

 

                                                                                        /s/                                       

                                                                                    Sam Hanson

                                                                                    Associate Justice