 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Jaramillo v. State, A06-817,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, May 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court's denial of postconviction motions to withdraw guilty plea and for relief based on claimed ineffective assistance of counsel was affirmed because defendant's answers to counsel's questions concerning plea admitted essential element of intent, defendant knowingly waived affirmative defenses, and counsel's representation was exemplary.
|
|||||
| Kern v. Kern, A06-2030,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, May 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a child custody dispute between a father and a mother, appellate court applied factors listed in Minn. Stat. § 518.17. Trial court should have granted request for an evidentiary hearing because father submitted a prima facie case of endangerment to children's welfare. Father provided stability, and father raised issue of mother's mental health.
|
|||||
| Larson v. Larson, A06-1046,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, May 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a dissolution proceeding, remand was necessary because, inter alia, additional findings were needed to explain an unequal division of property under Minn. Stat. § 518.58, subd. 1, and the record did not support the finding that the wife needed $ 60,000 of marital funds to meet her living expenses during the proceedings.
|
|||||
| Leiendecker v. Asian Women United of Minn., A06-959,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, May 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Dismissal of a former employee's defamation and tortious interference with contractual relations claim under Minn. R. Civ. P. 13.01 was improper as they were tort claims that were not subject to the compulsory-counterclaim rule. The breach of contract and Nonprofit Corporation Act claims were not ripe for review until the employee was terminated.
|
|||||
| Lynch v. Northland Group, A06-1129,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, May 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of unemployment benefits was affirmed because the record did not support the employee's assertion that the change in the commission structure would compel an average, reasonable worker to quit and become unemployed rather than remaining in the employment.
|
|||||
| Megas v. A & M Bus. Interior Servs., LLC, A06-1287,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, May 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: ULJ's finding employee lacked "good cause" for his absence from hearing was in error as Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 2(d) did not require that employee call department after the hearing had been held, rather, statute provided that if employee had good cause for missing hearing, employee was to file a request for reconsideration, which employee did.
|
|||||
| Rakhshani v. Chi. Title Ins. Co., A06-1206,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, May 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where an insured discovered a utility easement on his property, an insurer was entitled to summary judgment as to the insured's claim pursuant to an owner's title insurance policy because the testimony of the insured's appraiser regarding damages was properly excluded and the insured did not provide any admissible evidence of loss or damages.
|
|||||
| Seitz v. Higginbotham, A06-1269,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, May 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court's decision barring a police officer's testimony in appellant's case-in-chief in a personal injury action did not constitute prejudicial error, where the officer testified in respondent's case-in-chief, and appellant had not identified any evidence that she was unable to present to the jury because of the district court's ruling.
|
|||||
| Sorensen v. Comm'r of Pub. Safety, A06-1250,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, May 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Revocation of the petitioner's driver's license under the implied consent law was affirmed because the petitioner's arrest was justified, and the petitioner did not dispute that he was provided with a telephone and an opportunity to talk with an attorney.
|
|||||
| Staeheli v. City of St. Paul, A06-1146,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, May 22, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The decision of a city to cancel a licensee's license to evaluate homes under the St. Paul Truth-in-Sale-of-Housing program was proper because there was no indication that the licensee was prejudiced by the city's time limit imposed at the hearing and because the licensee had received formal notice of the hearing and had over a month to prepare.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
