The US Supreme Court on Tuesday declined to review a pair of decisions by the Minnesota Supreme Court that held employers cannot be required to reimburse workers for marijuana used to treat on-the-job injuries because the substance is illegal under …
MINNEAPOLIS — A recent ruling from the Minnesota Supreme Court saying doctors can be sued for malpractice even if they’re not directly treating a patient is causing angst in the state’s medical and legal communities. The high court said in …
Minnesota’s high court has declined to expand the state’s doctrine of implied primary assumption of risk to recreational skiing and snowboarding. The Minnesota Supreme Court came to that conclusion in Soderberg v. Anderson, published Jan. 23, 2019. The case involves …
A Minnesota man has taken a lawsuit against his father all the way to the Minnesota Supreme Court. The high court this week clarified a state law on public access for hunting, clearing the way for Corey Ouradnik to sue …
Under Minn. Stat. §604.18, insureds are entitled to recover taxable costs when an insurance company unreasonably denies insurance benefits. The statute provides a remedy of one-half of the “proceeds awarded” that are in excess of an amount offered by the …
The question of whether attorney’s fees awarded under Minnesota’s insurance unreasonable denial statute could exceed the policy limits of the policy was recently addressed by the Minnesota Supreme Court in Wilbur v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co., 892 NW2d …
The Minnesota Supreme Court on Wednesday rejected a man’s claim that he was coerced into agreeing to provide blood and urine samples used in his three DWI convictions. In a unanimous opinion, the court ruled that when Wesley Brooks of …
In a recent decision, the Minnesota high court found that insurers may have a right of recovery in claims involving tenant-caused property damage. RAM Mutual Insurance Co. sought to recover a payment it made to its insured, JD Property Management, …
In many property loss cases, distinguishing between “coverage” and the “amount of loss” will be straightforward for purposes of invoking appraisal. See, e.g., Kawa v. Nationwide Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 174 Misc.2d 407, 664 N.Y.S.2d 430 (N.Y. Sup. Ct. 1997), …