Madson v. MINNEAPOLIS POLICE DEPARTMENT

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Madson v. MINNEAPOLIS POLICE DEPARTMENT

787 N.W.2d 540, 2010 Minn. LEXIS 533, 2010 WL 3431870

Supreme Court of Minnesota·Decided August 25, 2010·No. A10-897·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 April 20, 2010, be, and the same is, affirmed without opinion. See Hoff v. Kempton, 317 N.W.2d 361, 366 (Minn.1982) (explaining that “[s]ummary affirmances have no precedential 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/Paul H. Anderson Associate 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 April 20, 2010, be, and the same is, affirmed without opinion. See Hoff v. Kempton, 317 N.W.2d 361, 366 (Minn.1982) (explaining that “[s]ummary affirmances have no precedential 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/Paul H. Anderson Associate Justice

Madson v. MINNEAPOLIS POLICE DEPARTMENT, 787 N.W.2d 540, 2010 Minn. LEXIS 533, 2010 WL 3431870 (Mich. 2010).

Pincite

787 N.W.2d 540 (Madson v. MINNEAPOLIS POLICE DEPARTMENT) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related