130 results for 'court:"Minnesota Supreme Court"'.
J. McKeig reverses the Court of Appeals' finding that the statute of limitations contained within the Minnesota Common Interest Ownership Act bars claims brought by one owner of a common interest community against another owner, which both parties had treated as severed from the community until the first owner sought financial contributions for repairs. The statute of limitations applies only to actions which "challenge the validity of an amendment or a supplemental declaration," and this action argues only that an amended declaration did not effectuate a severance of the second owner from its property interest in the community. Reversed.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: McKeig, Filed On: August 16, 2023, Case #: A22-0288, Categories: Property, Real Estate
J. Thissen partially vacates the tax court's valuation of a hotel. The county may use a "management-fee" method for valuation of full-service hotels when appropriate, and such a method is not unconstitutional. The tax court's adoption of a 6% reserve for replacement deduction was also not clearly erroneous, nor was its elimination of a duplicate deduction of a franchise fee. The tax court's sales comparison analysis of the hotel was also well-explained, with the exception of an apparent discrepancy between the 37% reduction the tax court applied to account for non-taxable personal property and business assets in a comparator hotel's sales price and the 43% reduction that results from this court's calculations. The case is remanded with a direction to conduct any recalculation or revised analysis required to explain or fix this discrepancy. Affirmed in party.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Thissen, Filed On: August 9, 2023, Case #: A22-1201, Categories: Property, Tax
J. Anderson partially reverses the Court of Appeals' decision on a Clean Water Act permit for the proposed copper-nickel mine. The Minnesota Pollution Control Agency's issuance of the permit was arbitrary and capricious, with several "danger signals" suggesting that it did not adequately consider the potential of a proposed mine to cause or contribute to an exceedance of water quality standards within the Lake Superior watershed. The permit also does not comply with a state law prohibiting discharge of industrial waste to the groundwater "unsaturated zone," but a prohibition on injecting polluted water directly to the groundwater "saturated zone" for long-term storage does not apply. The permit is remanded to the Minnesota Pollution Control Agency for further proceedings. Reversed in part.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Anderson, Filed On: August 2, 2023, Case #: A19-0112, Categories: Administrative Law, Environment
J. Hudson finds that the murder defendant's Sixth Amendment right to confrontation was not violated by the admission of the dying declaration of the murder victim, and that the district court did not err in finding that the defendant had waived his Fifth Amendment right to counsel when he began talking to police of his own volition, having had his Miranda rights repeated to him, after requesting counsel. There is also not a reasonable possibility that prior-bad-act evidence significantly affected the jury's verdict, even if it was erroneously admitted. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Hudson, Filed On: August 2, 2023, Case #: A22-0868, Categories: Confrontation, Miranda, Murder
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 Free
J. Anderson affirms the Court of Appeals' finding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding a body-worn camera recording of an assault victim's statements as inadmissible hearsay. The statements do not qualify as "excited utterances" under an exception to the Minnesota rule of evidence regarding hearsay since no ongoing emergency existed at the time the victim made them and they included descriptions of events that occurred several hours previously or even longer ago.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Anderson, Filed On: July 26, 2023, Case #: A22-0161, Categories: Evidence, Assault, Domestic Violence
J. Thissen finds that restrictions put on place by the district court banning the public from the defendant's first-degree aggravated robbery trial was a closure that implicated, but did not necessarily violate, the defendant's right to a public trial. While the availability of the trial to the public through a one-way video feed meant that the public-trial right was not necessarily violated, the record is insufficient to determine whether there was such a violation, and so the case is remanded to the district court for further proceedings to determine whether any violation occurred. Reversed.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Thissen, Filed On: July 26, 2023, Case #: A20-1638, Categories: Fair Trial, Robbery
Per Curiam, the Minnesota Supreme Court finds no clear error in the Lawyers Professional Responsibility Board panel's finding that attorney Michelle MacDonald had not proven by clear and convincing evidence that she had undergone the requisite moral change for reinstatement to the practice of law. The attorney's participation in a prayer circle with a judge she allegedly made false on-air statements about falls short of demonstrating remorse for improper actions, and her continued conduct after filing her petition for reinstatement, including assisting an individual in serving frivolous notices upon third parties, remains unaccounted for in this demonstration of remorse or any others.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: July 26, 2023, Case #: A21-1636, Categories: Attorney Discipline
J. Anderson affirms the defendant's premeditated murder conviction but reverses his second-degree intentional murder conviction. The district court did not violate the defendant's right to confrontation by preventing defense counsel from telling the jury that a testifying codefendant had taken a plea agreement to avoid a mandatory life sentence, and while it may have erred by not identifying the codefendant as an accomplice in jury instructions, the error did not affect the defendant's substantial rights. As the district court's only error, this issue does not adequately support the defendant's cumulative-effect argument. The second-degree murder conviction, however, was entered in error because it is a lesser-included offense of first-degree murder. Affirmed in part.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Anderson, Filed On: July 19, 2023, Case #: A22-0303, Categories: Confrontation, Murder, Jury Instructions
J. McKeig affirms the dismissal of the prisoner's second postconviction relief petition, which claimed ineffective assistance of appellate counsel and jury misconduct and sought to compel discovery. There is no reasonable probability, in light of overwhelming evidence that the prisoner killed his wife after searching for poisons and a hit man on the dark web, that the outcome of the prisoner's trial or appeals would have been different were it not for claimed errors. The prisoner also failed to meet his burden to show the need for a hearing on alleged jury misconduct. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: McKeig, Filed On: July 19, 2023, Case #: A22-1378, Categories: Ineffective Assistance, Jury, Murder
J. Hudson conditionally reinstates attorney William Winter to the practice of law following his 30-day suspension, subject to successful completion of a written examination on professional responsibility.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Hudson, Filed On: July 19, 2023, Case #: A21, Categories: Attorney Discipline
Per curiam, the Minnesota Supreme Court denies the attorney's petition for reinstatement to the practice of law, finding that proof of a required moral change is insufficient for reinstatement in light of a failure to establish intellectual competence required to practice law, regardless of the attorney's agreement to resign his license upon reinstatement.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Per curiam, Filed On: July 12, 2023, Case #: A20-0198, Categories: Attorney Discipline
J. Chutich affirms the Court of Appeals' determination that a trust amendment substantially complied with the original trust's terms dictating methods of amendment, and finds that the district court acted within its equitable powers to strike a provision requiring beneficiaries to "start acting [like] family again to my son" to receive payment while retaining the remainder of the amendment. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Chutich, Filed On: July 12, 2023, Case #: A22-0144, Categories: Trusts, Wills / Probate
J. Anderson reverses the Court of Appeals' reversal of the district court's ruling that a will's devise to the heirs of the decedent's ex-wife failed as a matter of law. The language of such a will cannot be read in a vacuum, and the circumstances in which the will was executed suggest that the portion of the estate given to the wife's "heirs-at-law" would have ceased to exist after the marriage's dissolution.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Anderson, Filed On: July 5, 2023, Case #: A21-1420, Categories: Family Law, Wills / Probate
J. Gildea reverses the Court of Appeals' finding that the district court's factual findings in a dispute over a divorced couple's daughter's college savings account were supported by the record, that an award of attorney fees to the ex-wife was within the district court's authority and that the amount of those fees was justified. The ex-husband's refusal to transfer his interest in the college savings account as required by a settlement and his disparaging emails to his wife and daughter were not sufficient to invoke the district court's inherent authority, since despite being "annoying to the district court," the conduct did not require sanctioning to preserve judicial function, nor did it violate a court order or disrupt further adjudication.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Gildea, Filed On: July 5, 2023, Case #: A21-1549, Categories: Family Law, Judiciary, Attorney Fees
J. Thissen affirms the district court's denial of the prisoner's motion to correct his sentence for a first-degree premeditated murder conviction. The failure to complete a sentencing worksheet for the prisoner's life sentence was not unlawful because a life sentence was mandated by minimums imposed by statute at the time of conviction. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Thissen, Filed On: June 28, 2023, Case #: A22-1609, Categories: Murder, Sentencing, Due Process
In two conflicting opinion-dissents, separate majorities of the court led by J. Hudson and J. Chutich find that under a Minnesota Rule of Civil Procedure requiring that an "action" be filed within one year of commencement, filing of an "action" means filing of the summons and complaint with the court, but that the homeowner's association's filing of that summons and complaint as an exhibit to an affidavit included with a memorandum in support of its motion for appointment of a neutral umpire was sufficient to meet this requirement.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Hudson; Chutich, Filed On: June 28, 2023, Case #: A21-0761, Categories: Civil Procedure, Insurance
J. Moore affirms the district court's dismissal of civil-rights claims brought by the offender, convicted of second-degree assault arising out of a set of circumstances that also gave rise to a kidnapping charge that was dismissed as part of a plea agreement. The Bureau of Criminal Apprehension's determination that the offender must register as a predatory offender did not constitute a continuing violation of civil rights, so the district court's dismissal of the claims on the grounds that they were time-barred was not erroneous. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Moore, Filed On: June 28, 2023, Case #: A21-1378, Categories: Civil Rights, Due Process
J. Chutich affirms the district court's denial of a postconviction relief request brought by a prisoner with outstanding convictions for first-degree premeditated murder and second-degree intentional murder. While good cause exists to extend a deadline to file the prisoner's notice of appeal, and thus the Supreme Court has jurisdiction to hear his case, the district court did not abuse its discretion by summarily denying the prisoner's claims, which fail on the merits. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Chutich, Filed On: June 28, 2023, Case #: A22-1817, Categories: Confrontation, Murder, Jurisdiction
J. Moore temporarily suspends attorney Fong Lee from the practice of law while disciplinary proceedings are pending, in keeping with a rule providing that attorneys be suspended while awaiting the conclusion of disciplinary proceedings when a referee has recommended disbarment.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Moore, Filed On: June 27, 2023, Case #: A23-0008, Categories: Attorney Discipline
J. Hudson suspends attorney Julie Bruggeman from the practice of law for a minimum of 90 days for representing clients with a conflict of interest, providing incompetent representation by naming an improper party as a defendant in a complaint and failing to properly serve defendants with the complaint, neglecting a matter, failing to communicate with clients, forging a client's signature on an affidavit filed with the court, making false statements to clients, failing to timely withdraw from representation, failing to provide clients with a copy of their file and to properly inform them regarding costs they would be responsible for, and fabricating documents and making false statements to the Director of the Office of Lawyers Professional Responsibility.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Hudson, Filed On: June 23, 2023, Case #: A23-0671, Categories: Attorney Discipline
J. McKeig affirms the Court of Appeals' decision that termination of the parental rights of a father convicted of an offense requiring registration as a predatory offender was proper. A juvenile court has subject-matter jurisdiction to terminate the parental rights of a presumed father, and conviction for a crime requiring predatory-offender registration is adequate grounds for termination of parental rights. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: McKeig, Filed On: June 21, 2023, Case #: A22-0589, Categories: Family Law, Jurisdiction
J. Moore reverses the Court of Appeals' dismissal of the environmental groups' challenge to the mining project's air emissions permit, finding that service upon the mining company before a 30-day deadline was sufficient under the Minnesota Administrative Procedures Act, and service to the company's counsel before that deadline was not necessary. Reversed.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Moore, Filed On: June 21, 2023, Case #: A22-0068, Categories: Civil Procedure, Environment
J. Gildea affirms the tax court's order to the Commissioner of Revenue to recalculate the natural gas pipeline owner's tax liability. The tax court's income-capitalization approach to valuation was not invalidated by its decision to largely disregard the commissioner's expert's opinions nor by its use of the commissioner's initial assessments in making its valuations. It also did not clearly err in finding that external obsolescence affected the pipelines' value. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Gildea, Filed On: June 14, 2023, Case #: A22-1069, Categories: Tax, Experts
J. Hudson suspends attorney Donald Nemer from the practice of law for a minimum of 90 days with two years of probation for professional misconduct including failing to properly document a cash payment, failing to diligently represent a client and to communicate with the client, knowingly disobeying an instruction from the court, making knowingly false and misleading statements to the court, and failing to clearly communicate the basis or rate of his fee, among other allegations.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Hudson, Filed On: June 14, 2023, Case #: A22-1836, Categories: Attorney Discipline
J. Hudson suspends attorney William Winter for a minimum of 30 days for engaging in explicit sexual conversations with a client, failing to recognize the conflict of interest those conversations created and attempting to engage in sexual relations with the client.
Court: Minnesota Supreme Court, Judge: Hudson, Filed On: June 14, 2023, Case #: A21-0831, Categories: Attorney Discipline