 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Lund v. Ind Sch. Dist. #110, A06-2182,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, November 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: ULJ's conclusion that an employee quit her employment without a good reason caused by her employer (a school district) under Minn. Stat. § 268.095, subd. 3 was proper because even if she felt the frequent assessment she received created an adverse situation, it was necessitated by deficiencies in her own performance and the needs of her students.
|
|||||
| Medek v. St. Peter Church & Sch., A06-2108,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, November 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where relator lost his job in the steel fabrication industry and accepted a new position requiring computer skills that he lacked, the job was unsuitable for purposes of Minn. Stat. § 268.095, subd. 1(3). When relator quit within the 30-day statutory period, he was not disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits.
|
|||||
| Modlin v. Faithful & Gould, Inc., A06-1720,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, November 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of unemployment benefits was affirmed because substantial evidence supported the unemployment law judge's finding that the employee quit his employment upon the expiration of his 90-day contract, even though continuing work was available, and that it was the employee's decision to end his employment.
|
|||||
| Niess v. Unknown Defendant X, A06-2449,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, November 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A court properly found that board members of Fire Instructors of Minnesota, a nonprofit corporation, were entitled to statutory immunity under Minn. Stat. § 317A.257, subd. 1 in appellant's defamation suit where members acted within scope of their responsibilities as directors when they voted to remove appellant from position of "service chairman."
|
|||||
| State v. Brown, A06-1456,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, November 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Officers had reasonable suspicion for an investigative stop under the Fourth Amendment because the informant's call to dispatch provided specific and articulable facts to support the criminal activity, including vehicle description, license-plate numbers, and driving location; officers located defendant where the informant said he would be.
|
|||||
| State v. Currie, A06-1149,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, November 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under Fourth Amendment and Minn. Const. art. I, § 10, trial court properly denied defendant's motion to suppress since (1) investigative stop was legal as he committed several traffic offenses; and (2) his movements either concealing or removing something from a hiding place allowed police to search him, the passenger, and the car for their safety.
|
|||||
| State v. Jackson, A06-1330,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, November 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Requirement under Minn. Stat. § 609.117 (2002) that defendant provide DNA sample to law enforcement was constitutional under Fourth Amendment and Minn. Const. art. I, § 10 because degree of intrusion on a convicted felon's privacy right was minimal and the degree to which it was needed to promote legitimate governmental interests was significant.
|
|||||
| State v. Padron, A06-1762,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, November 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not abuse its discretion in sentencing defendant to a presumptive executed 54-month prison sentence for first-degree driving while impaired, because defendant had a long history of criminal activity, including several prior convictions for alcohol-related driving offenses.
|
|||||
| Williams v. Nat'l Freight, Inc., A06-2113,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, November 13, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Res judicata and collateral estoppel did not bar the personal injury action, because the determination of the husband's negligence included his negligence in striking the driver and striking the claimant, and there was no final judgment on the merits as to whose negligence was responsible for the collision between the driver and the husband.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
