Shatek v. George A. Hormel & Co.

438 N.W.2d 924, 1989 Minn. LEXIS 105, 1989 WL 44509
CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota
DecidedMay 5, 1989
DocketNo. C1-88-1823
StatusPublished

This text of 438 N.W.2d 924 (Shatek v. George A. Hormel & Co.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Shatek v. George A. Hormel & Co., 438 N.W.2d 924, 1989 Minn. LEXIS 105, 1989 WL 44509 (Mich. 1989).

Opinion

ORDER

Based upon all the files, records, and proceedings herein,

WHEREAS the self-insured employer/relator sought certiorari for review of the issue as to whether the general recall letter sent by the self-insured employer/relator to all striking employees extended a genuine and unequivocal offer of suitable employment to a disabled employee which was refused upon the employee’s failure to respond to the letter; and

WHEREAS the court being evenly divided as to the issue presented on appeal;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the decision of the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals, filed July 28, 1988, be, and the same is, affirmed without opinion. See Anchor Cas. Co. v. Miller, 258 Minn. 585, 105 N.W.2d 689 (1960).

KELLEY, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

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

Related

Anchor Casualty Company v. Miller
105 N.W.2d 689 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1960)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
438 N.W.2d 924, 1989 Minn. LEXIS 105, 1989 WL 44509, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/shatek-v-george-a-hormel-co-minn-1989.