| MINNEAPOLIS PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEY |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
UNPUBLISHED CIVIL OPINIONS FROM THE MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALSA07-2049In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: David James Jannetta. CRIPPEN, Judge Appellant challenges his commitment as a sexually dangerous person, arguing that the evidence is insufficient to support the commitment, that the district court erred in committing him to the Minnesota Sex Offender Program, that the Minnesota Sexually Dangerous Person Act conflicts with his constitutional right to due process, and that he should have been given an opportunity to challenge the validity of the Minnesota Sex Offender Program at his commitment review hearing. We affirm. = = = = A07-1881 In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: D. D. and W. H., Parents. KALITOWSKI, Judge Appellant D.D. challenges the district court's order terminating her parental rights to S.L.H. Appellant argues that (1) the district court's application of the statutory presumption of palpable unfitness violated the doctrine of collateral estoppel; and (2) the record does not support termination of appellant's parental rights based on her palpable unfitness to be a party to the parent-child relationship. We affirm. = = = = A07-1813 In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Grady Ladonn Williams TOUSSAINT, Chief Judge Grady Ladonn Williams appeals the 2005 order initially committing him and the 2007 order indeterminately committing him to treatment in the Minnesota Sex Offender Program as a sexually dangerous person (SDP). Because (1) clear and convincing evidence supports the district court's orders for initial and indeterminate commitment, (2) the district court's determination that the Minnesota Sex Offender Program is the least-restrictive alternative is not clearly erroneous, and (3) the statutes were constitutionally applied to appellant, we affirm. = = = = A07-0676 In re the Marriage of: Judith M. Dunkin, petitioner, Respondent, vs. Richard L. Dunkin, Appellant. CONNOLLY, Judge Appellant-husband appeals from an order of the district court denying his posttrial motion for a new trial or amended findings regarding the award of temporary spousal maintenance to respondent-wife. Because the district court did not abuse its discretion, we affirm. = = = = A07-0514 Keith Baker, Appellant, vs. Sunbelt Business Brokers, Respondent, Dogs Howling, Inc., Respondent. WRIGHT, Judge In this action arising from the attempt to purchase a business, appellant challenges the dismissal of his lawsuit under Minn. R. Civ. P. 12.02(e) for failure to state a claim on which relief could be granted and moves to strike portions of respondents' appellate brief. All parties seek attorney fees related to the motion. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand. We also grant appellant's motion to strike portions of respondents' brief and deny each party's motion for attorney fees. = = = = A07-0378 Darl Gillespie, Respondent, vs. Ramsey County, et al., Appellants. CRIPPEN, Judge Appellants Ramsey County, et al., challenge the district court's order that denies in part their motion for summary judgment. The court concluded that appellants were not immune from suit brought by an inmate claiming personal injuries suffered while in the outside exercise yard of a correctional facility. We affirm. = = = = A07-0324 Elvin D. Siegel, Appellant, vs. R. Scott Nagel, Respondent. ROSS, Judge This appeal involves a land-ownership dispute between rural neighbors Elvin Siegel and Scott Nagel in Morrison County. Siegel, who destroyed 2,500 trees and a fence on Nagel's property at first repeatedly agreed to pay for the damage, but he later reneged. After Nagel sued to recover in trespass, Siegel defended aggressively, asserting for the first time in his counterclaim that, by virtue of adverse possession, Siegel actually owns the land where the alleged trespass occurred. The parties tried the case to the district court, which rejected Siegel's claim of ownership by adverse possession and awarded treble damages to Nagel for the trespass. Siegel appeals, challenging the district court's factual findings regarding the bases for adverse possession and the court's legal determination that Nagel's adverse possession claim also is barred by laches. Because the record supports the district court's findings that establish that Siegel failed to prove all of the elements of adverse possession, we affirm. = = = = A07-0284 Donna J. Saari, Relator, vs. The Long Term Care Group, Respondent, Department of Employment and Economic Development, Respondent. MINGE, Judge Relator appeals her denial of unemployment benefits. Because the unemployment law judge did not err in determining that relator did not quit for good reason attributable to the employer, we affirm. = = = = A07-0156 In re the Marriage of: Jean-Marie Baudhuin, petitioner, Appellant, vs. David J. Baudhuin, Respondent HALBROOKS, Judge In this second appeal arising out of marriage-dissolution proceedings, appellant contends that the district court erred by (1) failing to properly implement remand instructions regarding her spousal maintenance, (2) denying her subsequent motion to modify maintenance, (3) discharging alleged child-support arrears, (4) failing to properly implement remand instructions concerning ,000 that is still owed her under the parties' dissolution judgment and decree, (5) refusing to order judgment for her in the amount of ,833.64 that is owed to her under the dissolution judgment, and (6) awarding respondent conduct-based attorney fees. We affirm in part and remand. = = = = A06-2305 The Big Lake Association, Relator, vs. Saint Louis County Planning Commission, et al., Respondents, Big Lake Properties, LLC, Defendant, John A. Swenson, Respondent, Sheryl L. Swenson, Defendant, George P. Nall, Respondent. HALBROOKS, Judge In this appeal, relator Big Lake Association challenges respondent St. Louis County's grant of a conditional use permit (CUP) to Big Lake Properties, LLC. Relator argues that the county's decision to grant the CUP was arbitrary and capricious and requests that we reverse the grant of the CUP and remand this case to respondent St. Louis County Planning Commission for further hearings. Because the county's grant of the CUP was not unreasonable or arbitrary and capricious, we affirm. = = = = A07-0462 Frank Spencer, et al., Appellants, vs. State of Minnesota, Department of Corrections, Respondent. STONEBURNER, Judge In this appeal from summary judgment dismissing appellants' discrimination, retaliation, and reprisal claims against respondent, their state employer, appellants argue that the district court erred by (1) concluding appellant Robinson's claims for discrete acts of discrimination are time-barred and (2) concluding that appellants failed to make a prima facie case of discrimination, retaliation, or reprisal on the remaining claims. Because the district court correctly applied the statute of limitations to appellant Robinson's claims for failure to transfer and correctly concluded that Spencer, Grant, and Robinson failed to make a prima facie case on non-time-barred claims, we affirm in part. Because appellant Ekereuke presented sufficient evidence to make a prima facie case of race or national-origin discrimination on her claim of failure to promote and raised material fact questions about respondent's rebuttal evidence, we reverse summary judgment on that claim and remand for further proceedings in the district court. |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| 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. |
