|THE SAINT PAUL PERSONAL INJURY ATTORNEY|
UNPUBLISHED CIVIL OPINIONS FROM THE MINNESOTA COURT OF APPEALSJeremy J. Keith,
North Homes, Inc.,
Department of Employment and Economic Development,
TOUSSAINT, Chief Judge
Jeremy J. Keith brings a certiorari appeal from an unemployment
law judge's (ULJ) determination that he quit without good cause.
Because substantial evidence supports the ULJ's decision, and the ULJ
did not err in determining that relator did not have good cause to quit,
In re the Marriage of:
Judy Marie Creen, petitioner,
Michael Thomas Creen,
In this marital-dissolution proceeding, pro se appellant husband
argues that the district court (1) lacked jurisdiction over the
proceeding; (2) abused its discretion when it denied husband's requests
for an order compelling discovery by respondent wife; and (3) abused its
discretion when it divided the parties' property because it considered
husband's criminal record in the process and inequitably distributed the
marital property. Because we conclude that the district court did not
lack jurisdiction and did not abuse its discretion, we affirm.
Kristin Elizabeth Fischer, petitioner,
Scott Bruce Cottington,
Appellant-wife challenges the district court's order terminating
spousal maintenance, denying modification of child support, awarding
respondent-husband reimbursement of medical and educational expenses,
quashing subpoenas, denying an evidentiary hearing, and awarding
respondent conduct-based attorney fees. Because the district court
correctly applied the law and properly exercised its discretion, we
affirm on all issues.
Marjorie Ann Roggeman, petitioner,
Ben Edward Roggeman, Jr.,
On appeal from the district court's denial of appellant-husband's
motion to modify or terminate respondent-wife's spousal maintenance,
husband argues that the district court abused its discretion when it
found that the parties' changed circumstances do not necessitate
modification or termination of husband's maintenance obligation. We
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Ben Braylock
TOUSSAINT, Chief Judge
Appellant Ben Braylock challenges his indeterminate commitment as
a sexually dangerous person (SDP), arguing that (a) the evidence was
insufficient to meet the statutory requirements for commitment as an
SDP; (b) the SDP statute is unconstitutional because it is void for
vagueness; and (c) he presented sufficient evidence of an available
less-restrictive alternative to indeterminate commitment. Because we
observe no error in the trial court's determinations on the statutory
elements or on the constitutionality of the statute, we affirm.
In the Matter of the Risk Level Determination for R. L. S.
By writ of certiorari, relator challenges the administrative law
judge's order affirming the End of Confinement Review Committee's
classification of him as a risk level III offender, arguing (1) the End
of Confinement Review Committee exceeded its authority under the statute
by assigning him a risk level III when his Sex Offender Screening Tool
score would lead to a presumptive risk level II; and (2) the evidence
does not support the determination that relator should be assigned a
risk level III. We affirm.
| By visiting this page or clicking the
"submit" button above, you agree
that you have read and accept this "disclaimer".
Michael E. Douglas, Attorney at Law, Saint Paul MN. All Rights
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.