80 results for 'court:"Minnesota Court Of Appeals"'.
J. Connolly reverses the district court's determination that the personal representative's petition to hear and examine its predecessor's interim and final accounts of the estate was time-barred. An appeal of that decision is neither untimely nor premature, and the statute of limitations the predecessor cited is not applicable to the petition because the representative is not a "successor" to the estate's decedent but was asserting the rights of those successors in the petition. Reversed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Connolly, Filed On: April 29, 2024, Case #: A23-1675, Categories: Civil Procedure, Wills / Probate
J. Johnson affirms the district court's grant of the driver's wife's motion to dismiss the passenger's child's wrongful-death action stemming from a collision that killed the driver, the passenger and a third-party motorcyclist. A plaintiff may not assert a wrongful-death claim based on the alleged negligence of a deceased person by suing the person appointed as a trustee to commence a wrongful-death action for the benefit of that deceased person's spouse and next of kin rather than suing the personal representative of the deceased's estate. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Johnson, Filed On: April 22, 2024, Case #: A23-1080, Categories: Civil Procedure, Wrongful Death
J. Reyes reverses the administrative law judge's finding that the employee waived any right to continuation of health insurance coverage by signing a separation agreement. Administrative law judges do not have authority to decide whether individuals have contractually waived such claims under the relevant Minnesota statute. Reversed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Reyes, Filed On: April 22, 2024, Case #: A23-1024, Categories: Civil Procedure, Employment, Health Care
J. Johnson reverses the district court's dismissal of a charge for carrying a BB gun in a public place. A motor vehicle being driven on a public road is a public place, and a BB gun under the vehicle's driver's seat is therefore being carried in a public place for the purposes of the relevant statute. Reversed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Johnson, Filed On: April 15, 2024, Case #: A23-1257, Categories: Firearms, Vehicle
J. Frisch affirms the district court's grant of summary judgment to the school district transportation service coordinators and consultants in the transportation service providers' suit against them stemming from the providers' loss of actual or prospective business. Breach of illusory contract is not a cognizable cause of action under Minnesota law, and the district court properly disregarded several statements that would not be admissible at trial in considering summary judgment motions. Breach-of-contract and tortious-interference claims were also properly dismissed. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Frisch, Filed On: April 15, 2024, Case #: A23-0644, Categories: Interference With Contract, Contract
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. Segal finds that the district court improperly eliminated or reduced four of eight restitution awards in racketeering claims brought against defendant for fencing stolen vehicles because defendant's sworn affidavits challenging the restitution awards must be sufficiently detailed to inform the state that he intended to challenge the amount of loss for each challenged item, whereupon the state has a duty to present evidence proving the amount of loss. Affirmed in part.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Segal, Filed On: April 8, 2024, Case #: A23-0571, Categories: Theft, Restitution, Racketeering
J. Johnson reverses the district court's denial of the Minnesota Department of Transportation's motion for judgment as a matter of law in a case surrounding a road-construction contract, but affirms its entry of judgment in favor of the contractor on a claim for statutory interest penalties. The contractor did not provide evidence sufficient to prove that the Department breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, specifically failing to demonstrate that the Department's refusal to approve all of the contractor's requested haul roads was motivated by an improper ulterior motive. Desire to reduce damage to county roads as requested by the county is not such an improper motive, and the Department's disapproval of the use of certain roads for hauling is among the risks the contractor expressly assumed. The Department did, however, agree to pay additional compensation to the contractor, and that compensation is therefore an "undisputed billing" incurring interest penalties for untimely payment. Reversed in part.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Johnson, Filed On: April 1, 2024, Case #: A23-0664, Categories: Government, Contract
J. Cochran affirms the defendant's second-degree murder convictions, finding that officers' use of a "geofence warrant" to obtain information about cellular devices that may have been in the area near where a victim's body was found. Such warrants, which in this case requested anonymized device data from Google on the devices that entered a particular area during a particular time frame, then sought further information from Google for users identified as relevant to the investigation, are not categorically impermissible under either the Minnesota or U.S. Constitutions, and this particular geofence warrant was supported by probable cause and was sufficiently particular to satisfy the requirements of the Fourth Amendment and the privacy provisions of the Minnesota Constitution. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Cochran, Filed On: April 1, 2024, Case #: A22-1579, Categories: Murder, Search, Civil Rights
J. Cochran partially reverses the district court's denial of the customer's motions for judgment as a matter of law or a new trial on her claims against her local pharmacy and its head pharmacist, who refused to fill her prescription for emergency contraception. A refusal to dispense a valid prescription for emergency contraception is business discrimination under the Minnesota Human Rights Act, and the district court erred in instructing jurors that the customer needed to show a "material disadvantage" or "tangible change in conditions" to support a public-accommodations discrimination claim. The district court also erred in denying the motion for a new trial on the customer's claim against the pharmacy and aiding-and-abetting claims against the pharmacist for public-accommodations discrimination, but not in denying judgment as a matter of law or a new trial on the customer's business-discrimination claim against the pharmacy. Reversed in part.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Cochran, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: A23-0374, Categories: Civil Rights, Equal Protection
J. Connolly affirms the district court's denial of the defendant's motion to suppress evidence in her controlled-substances case, finding that police's search of her garbage was not a violation of her Fourth Amendment rights. The defendant did not have a reasonable expectation of privacy in her garbage, nor did a search of the trash constitute a trespass on the curtilage of her premises. Additionally, local ordinances banning inspection and removal of garbage do not enlarge the Fourth Amendment's protections or those under the Minnesota Constitution. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Connolly, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: A23-0428, Categories: Constitution, Drug Offender, Search
J. Wheelock affirms the district court's grant of summary judgment to the employer on cross-claims seeking indemnification for any judgment or settlement arising out of a medical-malpractice and negligence suit brought by a third party to this appeal who claimed that the employee injured his neck while performing a therapeutic massage. The An employer's common-law right of indemnification from an employee is not abrogated by a Minnesota law requiring indemnification because a different statute controls when employees are sued by reason of their employment relationship. Additionally, the employee has already been indemnified by an insurer, effectively negating any responsibility the employer had to indemnify her. . Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Wheelock, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: A23-0495, Categories: Employment, Indemnification, Medical Malpractice
J. Johnson partially reverses the district court's grant of summary judgment to the transgender weightlifter on her discrimination claims against the powerlifting competition sponsor, affirms its grant of summary judgment to the competition sponsor's purported Minnesota branch and reverses its orders for injunctive relief. Issues of material fact remain as to whether the competition sponsor excluded the weightlifter from its competitions because she was transgender, as well as whether it excluded her for a legitimate business purpose, namely its argument that having gone through male puberty, she would have an unfair competitive advantage due to increased bone density and muscle mass. No questions of material fact remain, however, as to the non-existence of the purported Minnesota branch of the sponsor. Reversed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Johnson, Filed On: March 18, 2024, Case #: A23-0373, Categories: Civil Rights, Equal Protection
J. Cochran affirms the Board of Water and Soil Resources' denial of administrative appeals of orders requiring the restoration of wetlands the appellants filled with aggregate and soil. State law authorizes local government units to electronically transmit notices of their decisions unless the recipient has provided a mailing address and specified that they prefer mailing. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Cochran, Filed On: March 11, 2024, Case #: A23-0642, Categories: Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Environment
J. Reyes affirms the defendant's DWI conviction, finding that the district court did not err by determining that the defendant's statements to paramedics were not protected by physician-patient privilege, nor by refusing to suppress evidence obtained through a search warrant for his medical records. Statements to paramedics are not covered by physician-patient privilege, and the presence of the defendant's girlfriend, who was not necessary or customary to his treatment rendered any statements nonprivileged.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Reyes, Filed On: March 4, 2024, Case #: A23-0516, Categories: Evidence, Dui
J. Frisch reverses the district court's order enforcing a settlement agreement reached in mediation proceedings. The district court correctly concluded that a party may authorize counsel to sign mediated settlement agreements, but erred in concluding that the record had sufficient evidence to establish the existence of an enforceable and signed agreement. Given the parties' disputes over the validity of any such agreement, the case is remanded for further proceedings and the district court may, on remand, reopen the record and allow for additional discovery. Reversed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Frisch, Filed On: March 4, 2024, Case #: A23-0884, Categories: Settlements, Mediation
J. Johnson affirms the district court's finding that the five-year-old is in need of protection or services because of his parents' refusal to continue his chemotherapy treatment, along with the court's orders requiring that treatment and placing the child with his grandmother. Regardless of whether the child's leukemia was "active" at time of trial, the child had a cancerous condition that required treatment, and the county provided sufficient grounds for its contention that chemotherapy was "necessary" or "required" care. The district court's orders requiring chemotherapy also do not violate the parents' constitutional rights to care, custody and control of the child, since the best interests of the child are served by "a treatment plan that is likely to save his life rather than an unspecified alternative plan that is likely to result in his death." Placing the child with the grandmother, with whom the parents are also allowed to reside, subject to conditions, is also justified by a statute requiring that children in temporary protective custody be placed "in the least restrictive setting," and "in closest proximity to the child's family as possible." Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Johnson, Filed On: February 26, 2024, Case #: A23-1176, Categories: Civil Rights, Family Law
J. Schmidt reverses the district court's denial of the child's motion for release from a juvenile detention center. The issue of the child's detention is moot, but can be adjudicated under an exception to the mootness doctrine because it is capable of repetition while evading review. Minnesota law also does not authorize counties to hold a nondelinquent child in secure detention facilities for longer than 24 hours, regardless of the county's contention that it is the least restrictive setting that meets the child's health and welfare needs. Reversed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Schmidt, Filed On: February 26, 2024, Case #: A23-1199, Categories: Civil Rights, Family Law
J. Connolly affirms the commissioner of health's determinations that the assisted-living facility operator maltreated and failed to provide appropriate care to a resident. The resident's 11 falls in the facility, including one in which she broke her leg and one which led to her death, and the facility's failure to review or update her care plan after any of these falls are sufficient evidence to support those determinations, and an investigator was not required to offer any alternative interventions to prove maltreatment. Attempts to impeach the credibility of the investigator also fail. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Connolly, Filed On: February 14, 2024, Case #: A23-0678, Categories: Administrative Law, Elder Abuse
J. Gaitas affirms the district court's grant of summary judgment to the insurer in its declaratory-judgment action concerning its coverage obligations for hail damage to its insureds' roof. The insureds have not shown that an exclusion of coverage for overhead and profit in their policy violate a Minnesota statute requiring insurers to cover repairs to roof decking associated with repairs to covered shingles. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Gaitas, Filed On: February 5, 2024, Case #: A23-0519, Categories: Insurance, Contract
J. Larson partially affirms the defendant's convictions for first-degree criminal sexual conduct. The infliction of bodily harm alone is sufficient to prove "force" for the purpose of such convictions, regardless of whether that harm caused a victim to submit to penetration. The state, however, charged the defendant for the same act of criminal sexual conduct under two alternative theories, and one of the defendant's two convictions must therefore be vacated. Affirmed in part.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Larson, Filed On: February 5, 2024, Case #: A23-0200, Categories: Sex Offender, Double Jeopardy
J. Johnson reverses the district court's grant of declaratory relief moving a road to property owners who favor a proposed purchase and redevelopment of their properties and others in the same subdivision, concurring with the opposing neighbors' argument that a district court cannot relocate easements in ways contrary to the plain language of the instrument which created the easement. Reversed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Johnson, Filed On: February 5, 2024, Case #: A23-0441, Categories: Civil Procedure, Property
J. Cochran affirms the district court's grant of summary judgment to the former police officer in his suit seeking health coverage. While the officer voluntarily ended his coverage for a period, a state law guaranteeing continued health insurance coverage for police officers or firefighters disabled in the line of duty until age 65 unambiguously requires public employers to make that coverage available until that age, regardless of voluntary lapses in coverage. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Cochran, Filed On: February 5, 2024, Case #: A23-0359, Categories: Health Care, Municipal Law
J. Ross partially reverses the imprisoned man's conviction for escape from custody, and dismisses an appeal of drug- and ammunition-possession charges. The imprisoned man has made no arguments supporting his notice of appeal for the drug and ammunition charges, but the district court abused its discretion in failing to instruct jurors that the state was required to prove that the prisoner's failure to return to custody following a furlough for his mother's funeral was voluntary and intentional. Reversed in part.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Ross, Filed On: February 5, 2024, Case #: A23-0128, Categories: Escape, Jury Instructions
J. Ross affirms a woman's indecent-exposure conviction for exposure of her breasts in a convenience store. Female breasts are "private parts" under Minnesota's indecent-exposure prohibition, apart from a statutory exclusion for breastfeeding. The woman's conduct, directing attention to her breasts and comparing her conduct to her employment at a strip club, also supports the contention that her self-exposure was lewd. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Ross, Filed On: February 5, 2024, Case #: A23-0158, Categories: Sex Offender, Public Indecency
J. Johnson reverses the defendant's stalking conviction, finding that she did not violate a temporary ex parte harassment restraining order by calling the protected person on her cell phone, since the restraining order had been expired for nine days at the time of the calls and no further harassment restraining orders had since been issued. Without sufficient evidence to prove that the harassment restraining order was violated, there is also not sufficient evidence to prove stalking. Reversed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Johnson, Filed On: January 29, 2024, Case #: A22-0079, Categories: Criminal Procedure, Harassment
J. Worke reverses the district court's denial of the now-19-year-old's petition for guardianship. The district court cannot deny petitions for guardianship of at-risk juveniles without making sufficient findings to justify its rejection of allegations that the juvenile has been abandoned, abused or neglected. In this case, the district court's conclusion that the juvenile had not established that reunification with one or more parents was not viable was erroneous, since it did not make findings as to whether either of his parents showed consistent interest in his well-being or as to whether his father maintained regular contact with him. Reversed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Worke, Filed On: January 29, 2024, Case #: A23-0865, Categories: Immigration, Guardianship, Juvenile Law
J. Ross affirms the defendant's criminal sexual conduct conviction. The state presented sufficient evidence to support the venue of the defendant's trial, namely the county from which his victim had recently run away and later returned rather than the intended destination of her flight. The defendant's argument that the child intended to reside outside of her home county is irrelevant and "rests largely on conjecture." A postconviction court also properly rejected the defendant's arguments that the state violated his due-process rights by failing to disclose juvenile-protection orders and that the court did so by refusing to appoint advisory counsel. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Ross, Filed On: January 29, 2024, Case #: A22-0054, Categories: Sex Offender, Jurisdiction
J. Reyes affirms the district court's denial of the grandmother's motion for an evidentiary hearing after she filed a motion for adoptive placement. The grandmother's failure to file a valid adoption home study or an affidavit, statutory prerequisites for such a hearing, meant that the court's refusal to hold the hearing was not erroneous. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Reyes, Filed On: January 29, 2024, Case #: A23-0877, Categories: Family Law, Juvenile Law
J. Reyes affirms the district court's adjudication of the minor as delinquent of fifth-degree criminal sexual conduct following his breach of a continuance for dismissal agreement. District courts retain subject-matter jurisdiction over adult defendants' termination hearings for continuances for dismissal until a defendant's 21st birthday under an exception to Minnesota's juvenile-jurisdiction statute permitting them to conduct a trial. Affirmed.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Reyes, Filed On: January 22, 2024, Case #: A23-0752, Categories: Juvenile Law, Sex Offender
J. Frisch affirms the district court's grant of summary judgment to the city in the landlords' suit seeking to overturn an ordinance barring landlords from discriminating against prospective tenants on the basis of their receipt of public assistance. The ordinance does not effect a physical or regulatory taking under the Minnesota Constitution, nor is it preempted by the Minnesota Human Rights Act.
Court: Minnesota Court Of Appeals, Judge: Frisch, Filed On: January 16, 2024, Case #: A23-0191, Categories: Constitution, Preemption, Housing