 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| C.B. v. Evangelical Lutheran Church in Am., A06-295,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, January 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A grant of summary judgment in favor of the churches in an action after a child was sexually abused by a minister was proper because there was no employment relationship between the minister and the churches for purposes of respondeat superior. Thus, the claims for vicarious liability, negligent supervision, and ratification also failed.
|
|||||
| In re Risk Level Determination of S.S., A06-36,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, January 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because Minn. Stat. § 244.052 required Minnesota Department of Corrections to develop and apply a weighted risk-assessment tool for assessing sex offenders' risk levels and the end-of-confinement review committee did not apply any weighted risk-assessment tool when assessing defendant's risk level, a redetermination of her risk level was necessary.
|
|||||
| Phillips v. State, A06-627,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, January 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Instructor did not have a constitutionally protected property interest entitling him to due process, because he had only a unilateral, subjective expectation of future employment at the college, when the terms of the instructor's appointment did not provide for renewal and gave him no property interest in reemployment for the coming semester.
|
|||||
| Progressive N. Ins. Co. v. Pietsch Chiropractic Clinic, Inc., A05-1455,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, January 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| Schramm v. Comm'r of Pub. Safety, A05-1736,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, January 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Furlong, A05-2029,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, January 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Norgaard, A06-56,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, January 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| State v. Timberlake, A06-72,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, January 16, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because officers lacked particularized and objective basis for suspecting that defendant did not have a gun permit, Minn. Stat. § 624.714, subd. 1a, or that defendant was engaged in some other type of criminal activity, the Terry stop of the car subjected defendant to an unreasonable search and seizure in violation of Minn. Const. art. I, § 10.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
