Location:    Oakdale, MN


Phone:         651-256-5004

Fax:              651-340-1456

Assistant:    Julie Parks


Qualified Neutral under Rule 114 of the Minnesota General Rules of Practice
Civil: Facilitative/Hybrid
Minnesota Judicial Branch Alternative Dispute Resolution Program
ADR I.D. # 6651

William Mitchell College of Law, J.D., 1996

St. Cloud State University, 1993

Areas of Practice

Court Admissions

  • All Minnesota State Courts
  • All Wisconsin State Courts
  • U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Wisconsin
  • U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin
  • U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit
  • U.S. Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit


  • Minnesota State Bar
  • State Bar of Wisconsin
  • Wisconsin Defense Counsel
  • Defense Research Institute
  • Minnesota Defense Lawyers
  • Minnesota Women Lawyers
  • Ramsey County Bar Association
  • National Association of Professional Women

Verdicts and Published Decisions

Attorney Ertz has tried as either first or second chair more than ten cases to successful jury verdict in both Minnesota and Wisconsin.  She has successfully briefed and argued cases to both the Minnesota and Wisconsin appeals courts.  The following are samples of her published opinions:

  • Laufman v. Safeco lns. Co., 833 N.W.2d 873 (Wis. Ct. App. May 21, 2013) The Wisconsin Court of Appeals affirmed the circuit court’s decision granting the insurer’s motions for declaratory, or in the alternative, summary judgment. The litigation concerned a dam owned by the insured, which required reconstruction or abandonment due to its noncompliance with federal licensing standards. The appellate court agreed with the insurer’s position that coverage was excluded under the policy provisions. The court held that insured’s “intentional” conduct of electing to do nothing to rectify the issues with the dam did not constitute an “accident” under the occurrence based policy. Accordingly, any damage arising out of the insured’s decision to abandon and remove the dam was intentional conduct that was not covered under the policy.
  • Olson v. Warm Prod., lnc., No. A12-2226, 2013 WL 3779323 (Minn. Ct. App. July 22, 2013)(unpublished opinion). ln a wrongful death suit stemming from the strangulation of an infant on the inner lift cord of a homemade roman shade, the Minnesota Court of Appeals held that the shade was a permanent improvement to real property because they were permanently mounted to the wall for more than 14 years, had never been removed, added capital value, and required extensive assembly and installation. ln finding that window coverings can be permanent improvements to real property, the court held that the plaintiff’s claims were precluded under the statute of repose.
  • Mercado v. Charter Oak Fire Ins. Co., No. 13-CV-124 (Jan. 29, 2014) Following an injury suffered by the plaintiff, a spectator at a horse race on the insured’s private property, the insurer moved for declaratory and summary judgment arguing coverage was precluded because horse races were outside the scope of the farm/ranch insurance policy. The insured indicated on all relevant applications that she operated a private horse farm, and competitive racing activities, as well as business activities, would not be conducted on the property. ln direct opposition to her statements the insured conducted regular, public horse races for profit. As such, coverage was precluded under the Use of Livestock or Other Animals Exclusion and the Business Pursuits Exclusion.


  • Selected for inclusion in “Super Lawyers–Rising Stars” ® by Law & Politics (Editions 2004-2009 & 2011)
  • Authored “Social Host Liability in Minnesota, “Bench Bar of Minnesota, June 1999 (Volume LVI Number V)
  • Authored “A Crap Shoot? Navigating Pollution Exclusion Clauses in Wisconsin State Bar’s Inside Track February 19, 2014
  • Appointed Ramsey County Ethics Committee (2014)
  • Law Firm and Corporate Challenge Chair Mitchell@Work (2010-2015)