 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Dailey v. Chermak, A05-1244,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, February 21, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court did not abuse its discretion in denying evidentiary hearing as to a mother's motion to change residence of parties' child from Minnesota to South Dakota where evidence did not support inference that she was intentionally attempting to reduce or restrict father's parenting time; father failed to establish prerequisites for evidentiary hearing.
|
|||||
| State v. Gillespie, A05-269,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, February 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's convictions for terroristic threats, false imprisonment, and fifth-degree domestic assault were proper pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 595.02, subd. 1, where the physician-patient privilege was personal and could not be invoked by a criminal defendant to shield himself from prosecution.
|
|||||
| In re Disciplinary Action against Pugh, C7-97-1350,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, March 2, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was disbarred from the practice of law in Minnesota because the attorney's misconduct, resulting in 32 felony convictions, continued over a period of more than three years, and resulted in the misappropriation of over $ 1 million from multiple clients of the attorney's real estate closing company.
|
|||||
| In re Rudawski, A05-484,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, March 2, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was suspended for 60 days for violating Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 5.5(a) for engaging in unauthorized practice of law while on involuntary restricted status for failure to comply with CLE requirements; he had to have known that a Supreme Court of Minnesota order was required for reinstatement, and any contrary belief of his was unreasonable.
|
|||||
| State v. Young, A04-0613,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, March 2, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence was sufficient to sustain murder convictions under Minn. Stat. § 609.05 where defendant burglarized the victim's apartment with the principal, defendant stood guard over the victim while the principal removed two others from the room, and after the victim was shot, defendant fled with the principal.
|
|||||
| Northwestern Nat'l Ins. Co. v. Carlson, A05-943,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, March 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment in favor of a creditor in a garnishment action was affirmed because a breach of contract occurred when the garnishee refused to indemnify its insured after judgment was entered against the garnishee's insured, or after the garnishee's insured was legally obligated to pay damages to the creditor.
|
|||||
| Rush v. Jostock, A05-714,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, March 7, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The court interpreted Minn. Stat. § 548.36, subd. 3(a) to exclude an offset for premiums paid to secure liability, collision, and/or comprehensive coverage. Allowing the driver, in her action stemming from an automobile accident, to offset her reduction in damages by the premiums would have provided a windfall.
|
|||||
| Lewis-Miller v. Ross, A04-2224,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, March 9, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: State supreme court affirmed a decision of the court of appeals that provided that an aunt was entitled to an evidentiary hearing under Minn. Stat. § 257C.03 on her petition for custody because the aunt established by affidavits a substantial relationship with the children and evidence of child-endangerment factors.
|
|||||
| Opsahl v. State, A04-1992,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, March 9, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Postconviction court did not abuse discretion by denying new trial request based on appellant's witness recantation claim where postconviction court was not "well-satisfied" that witnesses gave false testimony at trial; in addition, detective's behavior with witnesses, while improper, did not deny appellant's right to a fair evidentiary hearing.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
