Anderson v. XCEL ENERGY

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Anderson v. XCEL ENERGY

744 N.W.2d 236, 2008 Minn. LEXIS 41, 2008 WL 324826

Supreme Court of Minnesota·Decided February 5, 2008·No. A07-2119·Published

Opinion

ORDER

Based upon all the files, records and proceedings herein,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the decision of the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals filed October 15, 2007, be, and the same is, affirmed without opinion. See Hoff v. Kempton, 317 N.W.2d *237 361, 366 (Minn.1982) (explaining that “[s]ummary affirmances have no prece-dential value because they do not commit the court to any particular point of view,” doing no more than establishing the law of the case).

Employee is awarded $1,200 in attorney fees.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Russell A. Anderson Chief Justice

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

ORDER

Based upon all the files, records and proceedings herein,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the decision of the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals filed October 15, 2007, be, and the same is, affirmed without opinion. See Hoff v. Kempton, 317 N.W.2d *237 361, 366 (Minn.1982) (explaining that “[s]ummary affirmances have no prece-dential value because they do not commit the court to any particular point of view,” doing no more than establishing the law of the case).

Employee is awarded $1,200 in attorney fees.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Russell A. Anderson Chief Justice

Anderson v. XCEL ENERGY, 744 N.W.2d 236, 2008 Minn. LEXIS 41, 2008 WL 324826 (Mich. 2008).

Pincite

744 N.W.2d 236 (Anderson v. XCEL ENERGY) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.