| MINNEAPOLIS PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEY |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
UNPUBLISHED CIVIL OPINIONS FROM THE MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALSA06-2124In re the Marriage of: James Edwin Robbins, petitioner, Appellant, vs. Deborah Jane Robbins, n/k/a Deborah Jane Blowers, Respondent. RANDALL, Judge In this dissolution appeal appellant-husband argues (a) the record does not support the district court's determination that the homestead and business assets are items of marital property; (b) the record does not support the finding of respondent-wife's income; (c) the district court abused its discretion by forgiving certain pre-judgment child support arrears; and (d) appellant should have been awarded retroactive child support. We affirm. = = = = A06-2091 Cheryl M. Koehnen, Relator, vs. Titan Construction, Inc., Respondent, Department of Employment and Economic Development, Respondent. RANDALL, Judge Relator Cheryl M. Koehnen challenges her disqualification from receiving unemployment benefits due to employment misconduct. Relator argues that (a) her actions did not constitute employment misconduct and (b) the unemployment law judge's (ULJ) refusal of her request for an in-person hearing impacted her due process rights. We affirm. = = = = A06-1705 In re the Marriage of: Carmen Lillian Chappelear, petitioner, Appellant, vs. Robert Louis Chappelear, Respondent. RANDALL, Judge In this maintenance-modification dispute, appellant-wife argues that the district court (a) erred by finding that respondent-husband retired in good faith; (b) failed to make adequate findings to support its grant of husband's motion to modify his maintenance obligation to wife; and (c) improperly modified a portion of the property settlement when it reduced the amount of insurance husband had to carry to secure his maintenance obligation to wife. We affirm on all issues. = = = = A06-2223 Chippewa Valley Bean Company, Respondent, vs. Green Meadow Bean Company, Appellant. HUDSON, Judge On appeal from confirmation of an arbitration award, appellant Green Meadow Bean Company argues that the district court erred in confirming the arbitration award because the arbitrator did not have the power to arbitrate a quality dispute and the arbitration award did not draw its essence from the arbitration agreement. Because the arbitrator did not exceed his power in arbitrating the parties' dispute and the award draws its essence from the arbitration agreement, we affirm. = = = = A06-2125 Tri-Buu Cat Thiem, et al., Respondents, vs. Polka Dot Dairy, Appellant. HUDSON, Judge On appeal from summary judgment, appellant argues that the district court erred in granting summary judgment because there was a genuine issue of material fact as to whether respondent terminated the lease by implication. Because there are no genuine issues of material fact and the district court did not err in applying the law, we affirm. = = = = A07-0948 In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: S.B. and D.W., Parents. WORKE, Judge On appeal after a remand in which the district court terminated appellant's parental rights, appellant argues that there was insufficient evidence to support the termination of her parental rights and the finding that termination is in the child's best interests. Because we conclude that there is sufficient evidence to support both the termination of appellant's parental rights and the determination that termination is in the child's best interests, we affirm. The motion to strike portions of respondent Hennepin County Human Services and Public Health Department's brief on grounds that it contains documents outside of the record on appeal is denied. = = = = A06-2348 Jason V. Levar, Relator, vs. Zupancich Brothers Inc., Respondent, Department of Employment and Economic Development, Respondent. WORKE, Judge On certiorari appeal from the unemployment-law judge's decision that relator was discharged for misconduct and disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits, relator argues that his absence from work should have been excused because he called in sick to care for his ill fiancee. We affirm. = = = = A06-2341 Holly L. Johnson, Appellant, vs. Elk River Area School District, ISD No. 728, Respondent, Shauna L. Riveland, Respondent. HUSPENI, Judge Appellant challenges summary judgment granted to respondents, arguing that the district court erred in determining that the statute of limitations had run on appellant's claim of sexual abuse. Because the record clearly demonstrates that appellant knew of the abuse at least six years before bringing her claim and that she did not suffer any periods of insanity to toll the statute of limitations after reaching majority, we affirm. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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 Law Firm 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. |
