| MINNEAPOLIS PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEY |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
UNPUBLISHED CIVIL OPINIONS FROM THE MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALSA08-0373Ayan Hassan, Relator, vs. Dakota County Community Development Agency, Respondent. KLAPHAKE, Judge Relator Ayan Hassan challenges respondent Dakota County Community Development Agency's (CDA) termination of her Section 8 public housing benefits and its demand that she repay ,584 in rental assistance benefits she received from July through December 2007. The CDA terminated relator's benefits, alleging that she failed to provide proper 2006 tax documents and failed to report that her husband had moved into her rent-assisted unit in June 2007. We reverse because we conclude that (1) the CDA decision is not supported by substantial evidence that she failed either to provide proper tax documents or that her husband had moved into her rent-assisted unit; and (2) the CDA decision is arbitrary and capricious because it failed to consider evidence of relator's poor English proficiency and the effect that termination of her rental assistance would have on her five young children. = = = = A08-0374 Angela Sandstrom, Relator, vs. Dakota County Community Development Agency, Respondent. WORKE, Judge Relator challenges the termination of her Section-8-housing benefits, arguing that respondent-agency failed to consider alleged mitigating circumstances. We affirm. = = = = A08-0396 JoAnn Helfman, on behalf of the Estate of James R. Helfman, Appellant, vs. Ruth Ann Johnson, et al., Respondents. WORKE, Judge On appeal from a determination of damages in a minority shareholder dispute, appellant argues that the district court erred in (1) applying a discount to the valuation of the corporation; (2) awarding damages based on 18.75% ownership rather than 23.75%; and (3) not allowing additional distributions for 2003. We affirm. = = = = A08-0463 A08-0700 Kurt Donaldson, et al., Appellants, vs. Drake Bank, et al., Respondents, Partners Plus, et al., Respondents. BJORKMAN, Judge Appellants challenge the district court's grant of partial summary judgment and the subsequent award of attorney fees to respondent bank. We affirm. = = = = A08-0505 Robert Gunderson, Relator, vs. United Sugars Corp., Respondent, Department of Employment and Economic Development, Respondent. SHUMAKER, Judge In this certiorari appeal, relator argues that the unemployment law judge (ULJ) erred in determining that he is ineligible for unemployment benefits because he showed that (1) he quit for a good reason caused by his employer, and (2) his back injury made it medically necessary for him to quit. In addition, relator argues that the ULJ erred in finding that he was not entitled to a new evidentiary hearing based on a medical diagnosis he received from his doctor. Because the record shows that relator did not quit his job for good reason caused by his employer, that it was not medically necessary for him to do so, and that he failed to give any reason why his medical reports were not provided at the initial hearing, we affirm. = = = = George Ellis Johnson, et al., Appellants, vs. Progressive Northern Insurance Company, Respondent. KLAPHAKE, Judge Appellant Lance Clarke (Clarke) was severely injured in a one-car accident in 2004 while riding as a passenger in a vehicle driven by Jordan Wuollet. Because Wuollet's vehicle was underinsured, Clarke elected to seek 0,000 in underinsured motorist (UIM) benefits from each of two policies issued by Unigard Insurance Company (Unigard) and Farm Bureau Insurance Company (Farm Bureau) covering vehicles owned by Clarke's father and grandfather, respectively.1 Consistent with the language in the Unigard policy, a district court concluded that Clarke's father's ERISA carrier, Great West Health Care, had priority to recover the 0,000 tendered by Unigard for Clarke's paid medical expenses. Clarke then sought excess UIM coverage in the amount of 0,000 from respondent Progressive Northern Insurance Company (Progressive), an insurer of his grandfather's vehicle. We affirm the district court's decision to enter judgment on the pleadings because (1) although the record includes evidence outside the pleadings, such evidence does not differ from the evidence alleged in the complaint, and (2) the district court did not err in interpreting Minn. Stat. § 65B.49, subd. 3a(5) (2008), to limit Clarke's UIM recovery to the 0,000 he received from Farm Bureau in excess UIM benefits. = = = = A08-0637 In Re the Matter of the Application of: Kathy Lawrence for a Conditional Use Permit SHUMAKER, Judge Appellant Lake County Planning Commission denied respondent Kathy Lawrence's application for a conditional use permit to allow her to kennel 12 sled dogs, finding that the dogs would "create potential noise problems" and that a kennel was not a proper use of land in the area. The district court reversed and the commission appealed. We affirm. = = = = A08-0674 Patricia Savoren, Appellant, vs. LSI Corporation of America, Inc., Respondent. WORKE, Judge Appellant challenges the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of respondent and dismissal of her claims for marital-status employment discrimination and reprisal, arguing that the district court erred in determining that she failed to demonstrate any genuine issues of fact in regard to her claims. We affirm. = = = = A08-0739 Revestors Group 1, LLC, Respondent, vs. Larry S. Severson, et al., Appellants. KLAPHAKE, Judge Appellants Larry S. Severson and Severson, Sheldon, Dougherty & Molenda, P.A., challenge the district court's order denying their motion to compel arbitration in the legal malpractice case filed against them by respondent Revestors Group 1, LLC. Appellants argue that the district court erred by concluding that there was no agreement to arbitrate and that the issue was not arbitrable. Because the dispute between the parties is reasonably within the scope of an arbitration agreement and the arbitrability of the dispute must be determined by an arbitrator, the district court erred by refusing to order arbitration. We therefore reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. = = = = A08-1818 In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Michael J. Trones CRIPPEN , Judge Appellant challenges his indeterminate civil commitment, arguing that the state failed to prove the statutory elements for his commitment as mentally ill and dangerous. He also asserts district court errors in its evidentiary rulings and in its failure to determine appellant's competence before permitting him to curtail the review hearing. 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. |
