Supreme Court Opinions


IMPORTANT NOTICE

Appellate Courts will begin transmitting all notices, orders, and opinions electronically.

Beginning no later than July 1, 2011, the appellate courts will send notices, orders, opinions and correspondence related to pending cases to attorneys in those cases by e-mail rather than postal mail.  All attorneys with pending appellate cases who have not already registered an e-mail address should do so immediately.  Unrepresented parties with pending appellate cases may also participate in this e-notification system by registering an e-mail address.  Please go to the Clerk of Appellate Courts page for instructions how to register your e-mail address.
 

PREVIOUSLY PUBLISHED OPINIONS

Please visit the Minnesota State Law Library's Appellate Opinions Archive for previously published Supreme Court Opinions.


 

 

OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT

FILED Wednesday, April 18, 2018

NOTICE - MEDIA RELEASE TIME IS 10:00 A.M.



A16-1634        Rebecca Otto, in her official capacity as State Auditor of the State of Minnesota, Appellant/Cross-Respondent, vs. Wright
                         County, et al., Respondents/Cross-Appellants, Ramsey County, Respondent.
                         Court of Appeals.
            1.   Because the State Auditor retains significant duties and responsibilities in connection with audits of Minnesota counties, Minnesota Statutes § 6.481 (2016) does not violate the Separation of Powers Clause, Minn. Const. art. III, § 1.
            2.   Because the duties of the State Auditor are germane to the operation of state government, the Legislature did not violate the Single Subject Clause, Minn. Const. art. IV, § 17, in enacting Minnesota Statutes § 6.481.
            Affirmed.  Chief Justice Lorie S. Gildea.
            Took no part, Justice David L. Lillehaug.



A16-0736        Tony Webster, Appellant, vs. Hennepin County, et al., Respondents.
                         Court of Appeals.
            1.   Substantial evidence in the record supports the conclusion of the Administrative Law Judge that respondents’ established procedures did not “insure” appropriate and prompt responses to requests for government data as required by Minn. Stat. § 13.03, subd. 2(a) (2016).
            2.   Substantial evidence in the record does not support the conclusion of the Administrative Law Judge that respondents did not comply with Minn. Stat. § 13.03, subd. 1 (2016), by maintaining records containing government data in an arrangement and condition making them easily accessible for convenient use.
            3.   Under our precedent and the Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure, we do not have appellate jurisdiction to decide an issue when the aggrieved party failed to properly petition for review or request conditional cross-review on that issue.
            Affirmed in part, reversed in part, dismissed in part.  Justice G. Barry Anderson.
            Concurring in part and dissenting in part, Justice Margaret H. Chutich.



A16-1794        Craig Dewitt, Cross/Appellant, vs. London Road Rental Center, Inc., Respondent, Jach’s, Inc., d/b/a The Tower Tap &
                         Restaurant, et al., Appellants, Marlee Enterprise, Inc., Defendant.
                         Court of Appeals.
            1.   For a contractual indemnity clause to obligate an indemnitor to indemnify an indemnitee for the indemnitee’s own negligence, the indemnity clause must use express language that clearly and unequivocally shows the parties’ intent to transfer liability to the indemnitor.
            2.   A business renting tables from a rental company is not obligated to indemnify the rental company for claims related to the rental company’s own negligence because the rental agreement’s indemnity clause did not expressly transfer such liability to the business.
            Reversed and remanded.  Justice Margaret H. Chutich.


A16-1589        In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against George E. Hulstrand, Jr., a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0048033.
                         Supreme Court.
            Disbarment is the appropriate discipline for an attorney who misappropriated client funds, failed to safeguard client funds, neglected client matters, made false statements to a tribunal, filed a non-meritorious claim, failed to follow court orders, failed to appear for a court hearing, failed to communicate with clients, failed to promptly return client files, failed to refund unearned legal fees to clients, and failed to cooperate with disciplinary investigations. 
                     Per Curiam.


 


Opinion Sets

Opinion sets contain all opinions and orders. The sets are compressed into files that must be unpacked before opening them.

Opinion Set in a Zipped Word Document Format

  1. Click the above link.
  2. Save the unzipped file to your computer.
  3. Choose the "Open" option on the Download Complete screen.
  4. Extract the files to a location of your choice.
  5. Open the extracted file.

Opinion Set in a Zipped Rich Text Format

  1. Click the above link.
  2. Save the unzipped file to your computer.
  3. Choose the "Open" option on the Download Complete screen.
  4. Extract the files to a location of your choice.
  5. Open the extracted file.

 


ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS


NO ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS RECENTLY FILED

 


ORDERS ON PETITIONS FOR FURTHER REVIEW

FILED Tuesday, April 17, 2018


(Petitioner indicated in Italic Type)


1.      State of Minnesota vs. Dejonte Antwon Davis – A17-1108 – Denied
2.      Julie A. Soderberg vs. Lucas Anderson – A17-0827 – Granted
3.      ITMO Petition for Decertification of an Exclusive Representative for Certain Employees of the State of Minnesota – A17-0798 – Denied
4.      Ludwig P. Samson, Trustee for the Heirs and Next of Kin of Christine R. Samson vs. Jack W. Gordon, M. D., Essentia Health d/b/a Virginia
         Convalescent Center and/or f/k/a Virginia Regional Medical Center; et al. – A17-0721 – Denied
5.      James A. Compart, et al. vs. Justin J. Wolfstellar, et al., Bank of West – A17-0705 – Denied
6.      State of Minnesota vs. Qumari Kenneth Spencer – A17-0924 – Denied
7.      State of Minnesota vs. Ronald James Meyer – A17-0205 – Denied
8.      State of Minnesota vs. Danny Lee Zinski – A17-0136 – Granted/Stayed
9.      Jeremy Richard Ullrich vs. State of Minnesota – A17-0589 – Granted/Stayed
10.    State of Minnesota vs. Paul Scott Seeman – A17-1975 – Denied
11.    State of Minnesota vs. Davante Atkins – A17-0719 – Denied
12.    State of Minnesota vs. Jesse Lamee Motley – A17-0365 – Denied
13.    James Edward Cook, II vs. Hitomi Arimitsu – A17-0861 – Denied
14.    Krista Friese vs. American Family Mutual Insurance Company – A17-0908 – Denied
15.    In re: Estate of Loretta M. Chisholm – A17-0123 – Denied
16.    State of Minnesota vs. Shane Scott Stone – A17-0570 – Denied
17.    In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Kirk Alan Fugelseth – A17-1236 – Denied
18.    State of Minnesota vs. Nathan George Oliver – A17-0433 – Denied
19.    State of Minnesota vs. Brandon Deshawn Wilkes – A17-0463 – Denied
20.    State of Minnesota vs. Daniel James Hart – A17-0389 – Denied
21.    State of Minnesota vs. Shawn Thomas Rose – A17-0436 – Denied
22.    State of Minnesota vs. Ahmed Abdirahim Abdi – A17-0235 – Denied