MINNEAPOLIS PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEY  
attorney Michael E. Douglas Attorney at Law
  Personal Injury Attorney
  St. Paul Workers Compensation Lawyer work comp attorney
 > About Me
   :: My Commitment
   :: Our Community
   
 > Legal Practice Areas
  twin cities comsumer lawPersonal Injury
   :: Traffic Accidents
   :: Medical Malpractice
   :: Social Security Disability
   :: Premises Liability
   :: Wrongful Death
   :: Dog Bite
   :: Back/Spinal/Neck Injuries
   :: Whiplash
   :: Defective Medical Devices
   :: Defective Drugs
  Minnesota Personal InjuryWorkers Compensation
  St. Paul personal injuryConsumer Law
   :: Debt Collection
   :: Repossessions
   :: Foreclosures
   :: Loan, Credit, Banking
   :: Arbitration Agreements
   :: Deception and Fraud
   :: Auto Fraud / Lemon Law
   :: Warranties
   :: Predatory Lending
   
 > Contact Us
   :: Contact Us
 

Law Offices of Michael E. Douglas
P.O. Box 251551
Woodbury, Minnesota 55125-6551
   

 Saint Paul Lawyer
 
 mdouglas@injurylawtwincities.com

 

UNPUBLISHED CIVIL OPINIONS FROM THE MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALS

A08-0013

In re the Marriage of: Mary Ann McCarney, petitioner,
Respondent,

vs.

Paul Dean Hartleben,
Appellant.
STAUBER, Judge
On appeal in this dissolution matter, appellant-husband challenges the district court's spousal maintenance award to respondent-wife. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

= = = =

A08-0160

Chadwick Banken, et al.,
Appellants,

vs.

G. Scott Hoke, et al.,
Respondents.

COLLINS, Judge
Appellants challenge the dismissal of their legal-malpractice action, arguing that (1) the district court erred by concluding that appellants' expert-interrogatory answer was not sufficient to satisfy the expert-disclosure requirements of Minn. Stat. 544.42, subd. 4 (2008); (2) even if their expert-interrogatory answer was deficient, under the safe-harbor provision of the statute appellants are entitled to notice of the deficiencies and an additional 60 days to serve an amended affidavit; and (3) applying the mandatory-dismissal provision is a harsh consequence that ignores the legislative intent and violates public policy. We affirm.

= = = =

A08-0239

Patricia J. Fryhling,
Appellant,

vs.

Edward J. France, Jr., et al.,
Respondents.

COLLINS, Judge
Appellant challenges the district court's dismissal of her conciliation appeal for lack of jurisdiction, arguing that the district court erred by finding that appellant failed to comply with the requirements of Minn. R. Gen. Pract. 521 for removal of the cause to district court for trial. We affirm.

= = = =

A08-0402

In re the Marriage of: Marvin Louis Kowalski, petitioner,
Appellant,

vs.

Roxann Marie Kowalski,
Respondent.

STAUBER, Judge
On appeal in this marital-dissolution matter, appellant-husband argues that (1) the record does not support the determination that all of the down payment on the parties' homestead was attributable to respondent-wife's nonmarital funds; (2) the district court should have reopened the stipulation for mistake, inadvertence, or excusable neglect; and (3) the judgment is internally inconsistent in addressing whether a third party had an interest in certain property awarded to appellant. We affirm in part, reverse in part, and remand.

= = = =

A08-0433

Lisa A. Keegan,
Relator,

vs.

Thrifty Drug Stores Inc.,
Respondent,

Department of Employment and Economic Development,
Respondent

COLLINS, Judge
Relator challenges the decision of the unemployment law judge (ULJ) that relator is ineligible to receive unemployment benefits because she engaged in employment misconduct, arguing that (1) her request for reconsideration was not untimely; (2) termination of her employment was in retaliation for requesting information about filing a grievance; and (3) she did not commit employment misconduct. We affirm.

= = = =

A08-0825

Middle-Snake-Tamarac Rivers Watershed District,
Respondent,

vs.

James Stengrim,
Appellant.

PETERSON, Judge
Appellant challenges the denial of a summary-judgment motion brought under Minnesota's anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) statute, Minn. Stat. 554.01-.05 (2008), arguing that the district court's refusal to apply the statute was error. We reverse and remand.

= = = =

A08-1461

In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of:
Randy Earl Hammermeister.


ROSS, Judge
Randy Hammermeister challenges his indeterminate civil commitment as a sexually dangerous person and as a sexual psychopathic personality. He argues that the state failed to prove that he is highly likely to engage in future harmful sexual conduct and that he cannot control his deviant sexual interests. Because the record supports the district court's very detailed and thoroughly analyzed findings of fact and its conclusion that Hammermeister meets the statutory criteria for commitment, we affirm.


 

 
 
 

  What day were you injured?

  / /


  What caused your injuries?
Traffic/Bicycle Accident
Work-Related Injury
Wrongful Death
Dog Bite
Slip and Fall
Other:


  How have your injuries affected

  your life?

 


  What kinds of medical care
  professionals have you seen?

 


  What has your treatment cost?

 

  Is Insurance Involved?
My insurance may cover
        this.

Someone else's insurance
        may cover this.

I already filed a claim.
I rejected a settlement
        offer.

I accepted a settlement
        offer.

  Were there any witnesses?
Bystanders Witnessed This.
Police Responded and Filed
        a Police Report

Police Responded but Did
        Not File a Police Report


 

 

          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.