Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for FreeJ. Tostrud grants the employer's motion for summary judgment, finding that the Michigan-based employee has not established that she worked in Minnesota for the purposes of her Minnesota Human Rights Act and Minnesota Whistleblower Act claims. The employee was not present in Minnesota during the period in which she engaged in allegedly protected conduct and was terminated. The employer's location in Minnesota is not sufficient to qualify remote work as work in the state.
To read this case, start your 14-day free trial.
Request a free trial account to get access to more case data, documents, and features.
To provide the best experiences, we and our partners use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us and our partners to process personal data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site and show (non-) personalized ads. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Click below to consent to the above or make granular choices. Your choices will be applied to this site only. You can change your settings at any time, including withdrawing your consent, by using the toggles on the Cookie Policy, or by clicking on the manage consent button at the bottom of the screen.