Appellate Courts >
Supreme Court >
Supreme Court Opinions
Sign up to receive updates
Appellate Courts will begin transmitting all notices, orders, and opinions electronically.
Beginning no later than July 1, 2011, the appellate courts will send notices, orders, opinions and correspondence related to pending cases to attorneys in those cases by e-mail rather than postal mail. All attorneys with pending appellate cases who have not already registered an e-mail address should do so immediately. Unrepresented parties with pending appellate cases may also participate in this e-notification system by registering an e-mail address. Please go to http://www.mncourts.gov/?page=156 for instructions how to register your e-mail address.
OPINIONS OF THE SUPREME COURT
FILED WEDNESDAY, JULY 30, 2014
NOTICE - MEDIA RELEASE TIME IS 10:00 A.M.
A13-1868 James W. Stevens, Relator, vs. S.T. Services and CNA Insurance Companies,
Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals.
1. Under Minn. Stat. § 176.238, subd. 11 (2012), an employer may not petition to discontinue an employee’s workers’ compensation benefits if the employee has been adjudicated permanently totally disabled.
2. Because the relator was adjudicated permanently totally disabled, respondents were not allowed to petition under Minn. Stat. § 176.238, subd. 11, to discontinue the relator’s workers’ compensation benefits.
Reversed and remanded. Justice David L. Lillehaug.
A13-2353 State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Toby Earl Johnson, Appellant.
1. This court will not consider appellant’s argument that the district court improperly ordered restitution for a loss already reimbursed by an insurance company because the argument was made first on appeal.
2. Because Minn. Stat. § 611A.04 (2012) provides that victims can be reimbursed for “losses resulting from the crime,” the district court erred in using the outstanding value of a promissory note secured by the victim’s car as the measure of loss rather than the actual diminution in value caused to the car from the crime.
3. When a victim sustains indivisible loss from multiple defendants’ actions, the sentencing court has the authority to order restitution based on joint and several liability.
Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded. Justice David L. Lillehaug.
Took no part, Justice G. Barry Anderson.
The Adobe Reader must be used to view or print the opinions.
Click "Get Adobe Reader" button to download Adobe Reader free of charge.