Opinions Archive

1. Although an award of costs and disbursements is not subject to review under Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 117, a petition for an extraordinary writ under Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 120 may be an appropriate remedy to obtain review of that decision. 2. A prevailing party in an appeal is not entitled to tax the interest incurred on a loan used to secure a supersedeas bond. Writ of prohibition issued; reversed.

1. The referee’s findings that respondent Randall D. B. Tigue misappropriated client funds are not clearly erroneous. 2. Based on the circumstances of this case, the appropriate discipline for an attorney who misappropriated client funds is an indefinite suspension with the right to petition for reinstatement after 2 years and a permanent prohibition on being an authorized signer on a client trust account.

1. The test for distinguishing direct from derivative shareholder claims for purposes of determining the application of Minn. R. Civ. P. 23.09 focuses on the nature of the injury alleged to determine to whom any recovery is owed. 2. Taking the allegations of injury in the amended complaint as true for purposes of a motion to dismiss, the district court erred in dismissing, as derivative, claims alleging injuries to shareholders due to a capital-gains tax liability and diluted shareholder interests, but did not err in dismissing claims that asserted an injury due to an excise-tax reimbursement made to corporate officers and directors. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 1. Respondent Jennifer Casanova-Roers is suspended from the practice of law for a minimum of 60 days, effective 14 days from the date of this order. 2. Respondent shall comply with Rule 26, RLPR (requiring notice of suspension to clients, opposing counsel, and tribunals). 3. Respondent shall pay $900 in costs under Rule 24, RLPR.

1. The district court made sufficient findings of fact to support the grounds for the dispositional sentencing departure. 2. The record supports the district court’s finding that the respondent’s offense was less serious than the typical offense of third-degree criminal sexual conduct. Affirmed.

1. The district court did not clearly err by finding that appellant failed to make a prima facie showing that respondent had exercised a peremptory challenge to a potential juror on the basis of race. 2. The district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding irrelevant evidence and speculative argument. Affirmed.

A sentence based on an incorrect criminal history score is an illegal sentence subject to correction under Minnesota Rule of Criminal Procedure 27.03, subdivision 9, even if the sentence would still be within the presumptive sentencing guidelines range when calculated with the correct criminal history score.

When determining whether a juvenile’s conviction following certification for adult prosecution in another state should properly be included in an offender’s Minnesota criminal history score, a district court does not violate an offender’s constitutional right to a sentencing jury trial when it compares the Minnesota statute with that of the certifying state to decide whether the juvenile would have been certified as an adult under Minnesota law.

When the marital interest in a business entity is sold and includes, as part of the sale price, a provision for "earn-out" payments based on future company performance, the earnout payments are marital property, notwithstanding purchaser’s employment of one of the spouses under a separate employment agreement during the “earn-out” period.

1. A plaintiff who establishes liability on a claim of breach of fiduciary duty may, in appropriate circumstances, obtain relief in the form of monetary damages. 2. A document that is not an agreement between or among shareholders may be relevant to the reasonable expectations of shareholders in a closely held corporation for purposes of Minnesota Statutes section 302A.751, subdivision 3a.