| THE SAINT PAUL PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEY |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
UNPUBLISHED CIVIL OPINIONS FROM THE MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALSIn the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Jeremy Allan LundTOUSSAINT, Chief Judge On appeal from an order for his indeterminate commitment as a sexually dangerous person and a sexual psychopathic personality, appellant Jeremy Allan Lund argues that the evidence does not establish clearly and convincingly that he is highly likely to engage in future acts of harmful sexual conduct or that he has an utter lack of power to control his sexual impulses. Because the trial court's findings are not clearly erroneous, are supported by the record, and satisfy the criteria for civil commitment, we affirm. = = = = A06-776 Lenord E. Marquardt, Appellant, vs. Charles Wilkinson, D.D.S., et al., Respondents. TOUSSAINT, Chief Judge Appellant Lenord E. Marquardt challenges the district court's dismissal of his dental-negligence claim under Minn. Stat. ? 145.682 (2006) for non-compliance with the statute's expert-witness disclosure requirements. Because appellant's position on appeal is inconsistent with his petition before the district court and because his disclosures fail to satisfy the requirements of Minn. Stat. ? 145.682, we affirm. = = = = A06-762 Lisa Jones, Relator, vs. Contemporary Transportation, Respondent, Department of Employment and Economic Development, Respondent. PETERSON, Judge Pro se relator Lisa Jones challenges the decision by an unemployment-law judge (ULJ) that she is disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits because she quit her employment without good reason caused by the employer. Because the ULJ's findings are supported by substantial evidence and the ULJ's decision is not affected by error of law, we affirm. = = = = A06-709 David M. Hase, Relator, vs. Creative Woodcuts, Inc., Respondent, Department of Employment and Economic Development, Respondent. WILLIS, Judge By writ of certiorari, pro se relator challenges the decision of the unemployment-law judge that relator quit his employment and is therefore disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits. We affirm. = = = = A06-760 Randy Johnson, et al, petitioners, Appellants, vs. Randy Newbold, et al., Respondents. SHUMAKER, Judge Appellants challenge the district court's judgment confirming an arbitration award, arguing that the district court improperly modified the award. Appellants also argue that the district court erred by reserving claims for damages arising from the judgment. Because the district court properly construed the arbitration award in converting it into an enforceable judgment, we affirm. = = = = A06-181 In re the Marriage of: Leoniede M. Brennan, petitioner, Respondent, vs. William A. Braun, Appellant. HALBROOKS, Judge In this post-dissolution matter, pro se appellant challenges the district court's denial of his motion to modify the parenting schedule. We affirm. = = = = A06-789 Michelle E. Jorgensen Relator, vs. Department of Employment and Economic Development, Respondent. STONEBURNER, Judge Relator challenges the method used by respondent Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) to allocate income she received for coaching and for substitute teaching, which she asserts resulted in an overstatement of unemployment benefits that she was overpaid during the time she was coaching and substitute teaching. Because the record does not support DEED's determination that relator earned the coaching income in equal weekly amounts during the coaching season, we reverse and remand for recalculation of her benefits and overpayment. = = = = A06-424 Bashir Moghul, Relator, vs. City of Minneapolis, Respondent. STONEBURNER, Judge In this certiorari appeal, relator challenges respondent city's decision to demolish a building that he owns, arguing that the city failed to exercise any discretion and that its decision was arbitrary, capricious, not supported by substantial evidence, and made on unlawful procedure. We affirm. = = = = A06-532 In re the Marriage of: Sharon Ann Kimball, petitioner, Respondent, vs. Barney Edward Kimball, Appellant. WORKE, Judge On appeal from the denial of appellant's motion to modify his spousal-maintenance obligation upon his retirement, appellant argues that (1) his retirement constituted a substantial change in circumstances justifying a modification; (2) a correct application of the factors described in Richards v. Richards, 472 N.W.2d 162, 165 (Minn. App. 1991), shows that the findings that appellant retired in bad faith and is voluntarily unemployed are unsupported by the record; and (3) the record does not otherwise show bad faith by appellant. We affirm. = = = = A06-215 John Wesley Hebert, et al., Appellants, vs. City of Fifty Lakes, Respondent. WORKE, Judge On appeal from the dismissal of appellants' declaratory judgment action seeking damages for trespass and ejectment of respondent from a portion of their registered Torrens property, upon which respondent encroached when it laid a gravel road in 1971 that deviated from the platted road, appellants argue that (1) the district court erred in dismissing their claims because respondent is a mere trespasser and its purported adverse possession of Torrens property can never ripen into title, (2) respondent never properly invoked its power of eminent domain by initiating condemnation proceedings, and (3) respondent's action did not constitute a de facto taking. Respondent counters that its action constituted a de facto taking rather than a tortious trespass or adverse possession. Because we find that the nature of respondent's encroachment under the facts and circumstances of this case is more akin to a temporary intrusion onto appellants' property, we hold that a de facto taking did not take place, and we reverse and remand to the district court for further proceedings. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| By visiting this page or clicking the "submit" button above, you agree that you have read and accept this "disclaimer". |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright ©
Michael E. Douglas, Attorney at Law, Saint Paul MN. All Rights
Reserved. Minnesota Lawyer representing Personal Injury, Car / Auto Accident, Workers Compensation, Medical Malpractice, Social Security Disability claims. Dedicated to Injured Workers, Victims of Negligence, Car Accidents, Victims of Fraud, and those in need of legal assistance. |
