Minnesota Supreme Court Watch

Minnesota Supreme Court Watch follows cases pending before the Minnesota Supreme Court. Distributed as an e-newsletter, it provides highlights of key topics up for review (below) and a summary of issues and links to respective Minnesota Court of Appeals decisions. To sign up for Minnesota Supreme Court Watch, please  us.

>>Minnesota Supreme Court Watch - Current Issue (PDF)

Issues Before The Supreme Court 
The 45 civil cases pending before the Supreme Court cover a wide range of topics.  Miller v. Lankow involves a district court’s decision to exclude all physical evidence as a sanction for spoliation.  The court of appeals held that the district court’s sanction, although “harsh,” did not violate the “least restrictive sanction” rule or abuse discretion because the spoliation prejudiced respondents by preventing a full and independent investigation of appellant’s claims. 

Several pending cases involve preemption or immunity issues: 

• Angell v. Angell – preemption by federal act that protects military death benefits as applied to division of non-marital property;

• J.E.B. v. Danks – immunity for civil claims resulting from defendant's voluntary report of possible sexual abuse;

• Additional immunity / preemption cases include: Lund v. Commissioner of Public Safety; Lickteig v. Kolar; Zutz v. Nelson; Middle-Snake-Tamarac Rivers Watershed District v. Stengrim; In re Denial of Certification of Variance Granted to Haslund ex rel. City of St. Mary’s Point.

Recently Decided Cases

In re Hubbard
Agreeing with arguments presented by Briggs and Morgan, the Supreme Court decided In re Hubbard, a case that sharply limited the DNR’s, and likely other administrative agencies’ rule-making power in the absence of express legislative authority.  The issue was whether the Legislature granted the DNR the authority to create rules requiring local governmental units to remit local zoning decisions related to the Lower St. Croix River for the DNR’s certification or rejection.  The Court found that the Legislature had not expressly or impliedly authorized the DNR to promulgate such rules.  The Hubbard decision will undoubtedly have an impact on all practitioners that regularly deal with administrative agencies, particularly those who represent clients that are heavily regulated.

Goodman v. Best Buy
Employment law practitioners will want to take note of the Supreme Court’s decision in Goodman v. Best Buy.  The Court interpreted 28 U.S.C. § 1367(d), which according to the Supreme Court, provides for a suspension of the limitations period while claims are pending in federal court and for 30 days after such federal claims are dismissed.  The Supreme Court’s decision may provide employees with additional time to re-file state claims.  

View all Pending Minnesota Supreme Court Cases, including additional links to the court of appeals’ decision referenced here.
 

Minnesota Supreme Court Watch Archives

January 2010 (PDF)

November 2009 (PDF)

September 2009 (PDF)

July 2009 (PDF)

May 2009 (PDF)

March 2009 (PDF)

January 2009 (PDF)

November 2008 (PDF)

Briggs' Appellate Group consults with law firms and individual practitioners on matters pending appeal, and also offers skilled representation in state and federal appellate courts. If you have questions about the appellate process, including amicus representation, please contact a member of the Appellate Group.