skip to content
Primary navigation

Opinions Archive

Results 1 - 10 of 1298
Relators Mary and John Kattar contest respondent City of St. Paul’s order requiring them to demolish their house, which was so filled with property that a code-compliance inspection was deemed impossible. The Kattars contend that the city failed to consider certain important aspects of the situation, including the disruption caused by COVID-19 and the difficulties posed by Mary Kattar’s hoarding condition, and as a result claim the city’s decision was arbitrary and capricious. We affirm.
Date: December 06, 2021
Father appeals from an order cancelling a second-opinion evaluation of daughter’s readiness for reunification therapy. He argues the district court abused its discretion by: (A) misinterpreting the order allowing father to request a second-opinion evaluation, (B) relying on facts outside the record, and (C) adding a new requirement before the evaluation could take place. Because the district court did not abuse its discretion, we affirm.
Date: December 06, 2021
In this uninsured motorist (UM) benefits action, appellant Kawaljit Bhatia challenges the district court’s grant of respondent insurer’s summary-judgment motion. Bhatia argues that there is a genuine fact issue as to whether his daughter was a resident relative under his insurance policy when she was killed in a fall from a motorcycle. Because the record evidence does not establish a genuine issue of material fact regarding his daughter’s residence, we affirm.
Date: December 06, 2021
Following a shooting close to a Maplewood concert venue, respondent City of Maplewood’s city council—concerned about criminal activity by patrons—demanded changes by the venue’s owner, appellant The Myth Live II (the Myth). The council proposed an action plan that imposed conditions on the Myth’s liquor license designed to increase public safety. This included a provision that if there was substantial noncompliance with the action plan, the police chief could temporarily close the venue. After several meetings and passage of the action plan by the city council, the Myth sued the city, alleging that it did not consent to the action plan. Both parties moved for summary judgment. The district court granted the city’s motion, finding that the Myth agreed to the action plan. The Myth appealed. Because there was an agreement to the terms of the conditions on the liquor license, we affirm.
Date: December 06, 2021
A Carver County jury found Matthew James Preston guilty of failure to register as a predatory offender. We conclude that Preston's constitutional right to a speedy trial was not violated. We also conclude that Preston's prose arguments do not require reversal or a new trial. Therefore, we affirm.
Date: December 06, 2021
n this direct appeal of her conviction for test refusal, appellant challenges the denial of her request to continue the trial until apprehension of an anticipated defense witness. Because the district court did not abuse its discretion, we affirm the conviction.
Date: December 06, 2021
After juvenile appellant N.R.C.-A. was charged with possession of child pornography for engaging in voluntary “sexting” with a teen two years his junior, he agreed to a continuance for dismissal, which was eventually terminated, and he was adjudicated delinquent. In this appeal, N.R.C.-A. argues that his adjudication should be reversed  Retired judge of the Minnesota Court of Appeals, serving by appointment pursuant to Minn. Const. art. VI, § 10. because (1) the district court erred when it concluded that N.R.C.-A. materially violated the continuance-for-dismissal agreement; (2) the district court erred when it denied his motion to dismiss based on selective prosecution; (3) the child-pornography statute, as applied to teenage couples engaging in voluntary sexting, violates fundamental due- process rights; and (4) the evidence is insufficient to adjudicate him delinquent because the child-pornography statute does not criminalize voluntary teen sexting. We conclude that the district court did not err in its ruling that N.R.C.-A. materially violated the continuance-for-dismissal agreement or its ruling that N.R.C.-A. was selectively prosecuted based on his gender. We decline to address N.R.C.-A.’s as-applied due-process challenge because N.R.C.-A. did not raise the issue in the district court. Finally, we conclude that the evidence is sufficient to support N.R.C.-A.’s delinquency adjudication under the plain language of the child-pornography statute. We therefore affirm.
Date: December 06, 2021
Appellant challenges the district court’s decision to dismiss his petition for a harassment restraining order without a full evidentiary hearing, arguing that his petition stated a sufficient basis for the relief sought and that the district court erred in determining his petition was made in retaliation for events in his daughter’s marital dissolution case. Because the district court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing appellant’s harassment restraining order petition without an evidentiary hearing, we affirm.
Date: December 06, 2021
Appellant Nicholas Scott Thompson was indefinitely committed as mentally ill and dangerous. On appeal, he challenges the district court’s determinations supporting his commitment. Because we conclude that the record establishes clear and convincing evidence that he is mentally ill and dangerous to the public, we affirm.
Date: December 06, 2021
Relator challenges the decision of an unemployment-law judge that she is ineligible for unemployment benefits because she quit her employment and no statutory exception applies. We affirm.
Date: December 06, 2021
back to top