Supreme Court Digest: August 14

Civil Opinions

Arbitration – Immunity

Respondent, a snowplow driver for the City of Alexandria, crossed the center line in his snow plow and collided with the vehicle of appellant, causing appellant’s vehicle to roll over. Appellant brought a personal injury action against both the city and respondent. At around the same time, appellant’s insurance company sought arbitration against the city under Minn. Stat. sec. 65B.53, subd. 4 (2012), seeking repayment of $23,326 in basic economic loss benefits paid to appellant. In the personal injury action in District Court, the city moved for summary judgment, arguing that appellant’s claim was barred by statutory discretionary immunity, common law official immunity, and statutory “snow and ice immunity” under Minn. Stat. sec. 466.03, subd. 4(a) (2012). The District Court denied the city’s summary judgment motion, concluding that the involvement (or lack thereof) of snow and ice in the collision was a question of material fact making summary judgment inappropriate. Insurance company intervened in the action, and the Court of Appeals affirmed the District Court’s denial of summary judgment. The Supreme Court held that claims of immunity, including necessary questions of fact, are determined by the District Court prior to arbitration on the merits under the Minnesota No-Fault Automobile Insurance Act, Minn. Stat. secs. 65B.41-71 (2012). Affirmed.

A11-1904 Fernow v. Gould (Court of Appeals)

Click for Full Text

Equal Pay for Equal Work Law – Wages

Appellants, roughly 750 servers, bartenders, and security guards, brought a class action against their employers, respondent. The employees alleged five causes of action, including “Unlawful Deductions” made in violation of Minn. Stat. sec. 181.79 (2012). The jury found that the employers did not violate section 181.79. The Court of Appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court held that (1) under Minn. Stat. sec. 181.79 (2012), the term “wages” is defined by the Equal Pay for Equal Work Law, Minn. Stat. sec. 181.66 (2012), and gratuities are included within “wages” under that definition; (2) in order to prove a violation of Minn. Stat. sec. 181.79, employees do not have to show that because of deductions their wages fell below the minimum wage in Minn. Stat. sec. 177.24 (2012). Reversed and remanded.

A12-0166 Karl v. Uptown Drink, LLC (Court of Appeals)

Click for Full Text

Criminal Opinions

Criminal Vehicular Homicide – Causation

After a jury trial, appellant was found guilty and subsequently convicted of criminal vehicular homicide for causing the death of a 93-year-old in a motor vehicle accident. The District Court sentenced appellant to 120 months’ imprisonment on the criminal vehicular homicide conviction. Appellant appealed and the Court of Appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court held that (1) the District Court’s instruction on causation was not erroneous; (2) the evidence was sufficient for the jury to conclude that the defendant’s operation of a motor vehicle was the proximate cause of the victim’s death, and (3) the evidence was sufficient for the jury to conclude that the victim’s do-not-resuscitate order was not a superseding cause of her death. Affirmed.

A11-1687 State v. Smith (Court of Appeals)

Click for Full Text

Orders

Attorney Discipline – Indefinite Suspension

Christopher Stephen Petros is indefinitely suspended from the practice of law for a minimum of 90 days.

A13-1003 In re Petros

Click for Full Text