Minnesota Lawyer

For more than 50 years, the Minnesota Supreme Court has succeeded in maintaining an excellent professional responsibility system. Public participation and accountability have been essential system components.

Last week’s occurrence of April Fool’s Day was a day for shenanigans and a reminder that of some of the jokes and pranks that have ended up in litigation in the federal and state courts in Minnesota.

The question employers have pondered for some time is ripe for decision: Can employers require their employees to get vaccinated?

Last year ended as the Supreme Court reversed the Court of Appeals in a firearm case, and this year began with a bang with a pair of additional gun-related matters pending before that tribunal.

With Friday's State v. Chauvin ruling, there will be ripples in the fabric of appellate and trial law caused by the clear declaration that when the Court of Appeals designates its opinion to be precedent, it is immediately binding.

Guardians are subject to oversight by the judiciary. That scrutiny occasionally leads to litigation, which is usually fairly desultory and low-profile. But a ruling by the Minnesota Court of Appeals attracted attention.

Because it’s an issue that impacts every submission to the district and appellate courts, we thought it important to call one more development to the attention of the practicing bar.

The small number of unemployment compensation claimants who appeal adverse rulings by the state to the Minnesota Court of Appeals usually fail there, too.

The deaths late last year of a couple of notable Minnesotans evoked memories of their roles more than two decades ago in the evolution of defamation law in this state.

Electronic evidence from smart speakers has yet to have a measurable impact in adjudicating criminal or civil cases in the U.S. But with over 150 million smart speakers out there and Amazon Alexa with 70% market share that day is coming soon.