Opinions Archive
Results 1 - 10 of 1295
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of:
Andrew Stephen Williams.
SPECIAL
TERM
ORDER
1
A25-2081
Considered and decided ...
Date:
January
13, 2026
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
County of Hennepin,
Respondent,
vs.
Jill Kline Rochford,
Appellant,
Ross Edgar Trooien,
Respondent.
SPECIAL
TERM
ORDER
...
Date:
January
13, 2026
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
Michael Kwabena Asiedu,
Appellant,
vs.
Terry Eastlund, et al.,
Respondents.
SPECIAL
TERM
ORDER
1
A25-2106
Considered ...
Date:
January
13, 2026
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
In re Fairview Health Services, Petitioner,
Hamid Abbasi,
Respondent,
vs.
Fairview Health Services,
Petitioner.
SPECIAL
...
Date:
January
13, 2026
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
Michael Kwabena Asiedu,
Appellant,
vs.
Terry Eastlund, et al.,
Respondents.
SPECIAL
TERM
ORDER
1
A25-2106
Considered ...
Date:
January
13, 2026
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
In re Robert Michael Hughes,
Robert Michael Hughes,
Petitioner,
vs.
In Re: State of Minnesota, et al.,
Respondents.
...
Date:
January
13, 2026
Under Minnesota Statutes section 211B.04, subdivision 1(a) (2024), a disclaimer is “prominently include[d]” on campaign material when it is conspicuous and readily noticeable to the electorate that is the intended recipient of the material. Reversed and remanded.
Date:
January
12, 2026
Appellant Lisa Breitkreutz challenges her civil commitment by the district court as a person who poses a risk of harm due to mental illness. Breitkreutz, who is self-represented in this appeal, appears to argue that (1) the district court denied her procedural and substantive due process of law; (2) the necessary elements for civil commitment were not proved because she is not a danger to herself or others, she has not been diagnosed with a mental illness, the district court did not consider less restrictive alternatives, and her commitment was based, in part, on perjured evidence; and (3) she was not provided adequate assistance of counsel. We affirm.
Date:
January
12, 2026
Appellant argues that the district court erred by denying its motion to vacate a no-fault arbitration award. Because the arbitrator did not exceed their powers by awarding benefits to respondent, we affirm.
Date:
January
12, 2026
In this appeal from his judgment of conviction, appellant James Allen Denker challenges the validity of his guilty plea, arguing that it was (1) inaccurate and (2) involuntary. Appellant argues that he is entitled to withdraw his plea because the factual basis supporting his plea of guilt to fifth-degree possession of a controlled substance does not establish that he knowingly possessed methamphetamine. He also argues that his plea was not voluntary. We affirm.
Date:
January
12, 2026