Kim Lund is urging the Minnesota Supreme Court to dismiss a claim by grocery company Lunds Inc. to overturn a $45 million award to her, saying it presented no new or unique legal arguments.
The filing this week is the latest missive in an ugly legal dispute between Kim Lund and her three younger siblings — led by Russell "Tres" Lund. At issue is Kim Lund's quest to cash out her one-quarter stake in Lunds Inc., which owns the Lunds & Byerlys supermarket chain.
Kim Lund's filing said both the district and appeals courts took "measured and well-considered efforts … to fairly and permanently bring this family business tragedy to an end, while assuring the long-term viability of the Lund family businesses."
The Supreme Court will likely decide this spring whether to review the case. The court on average agrees to hear only 12 to 13 percent of the petitions it receives annually.
Kim Lund had talked about cashing out some of her stake in the family business as early as 1992. Amicable attempts over the years to settle the matter failed, and in 2014 Kim Lund sued Lunds Inc. and Tres Lund.
After a five-day trial in 2017, Hennepin County Chief Judge Ivy Bernhardson awarded Kim Lund $45.2 million for her stake, less than the $80 million she sought, but more than double the $21.3 million Lunds Inc. had offered. The Minnesota Court of Appeals upheld Bernhardson's judgment.
Lunds Inc., in its petition to the Supreme Court, contends that the appeals court set a "dangerous precedent" on the legal interpretation of shareholder agreements. The company argues that Kim Lund could not sell her stake without unanimous written consent of the other three sibling shareholders.
In her response, Kim Lund said both lower courts considered the written agreement factor "as expressly articulated in their decisions."
The Lunds' petition, Kim Lund's filing argues, presents "no unique questions not already answered by existing jurisprudence. … The case is, in all material respects, like any other family-owned business dispute."
Lunds said in a statement, "The outcome of this case will have a significant impact on all trusts, estates and businesses incorporated in Minnesota with minority shareholders."