EN BANC CALENDAR

Before the Minnesota Supreme Court

November 2021

SUMMARY OF ISSUES

Summaries prepared by the Supreme Court Commissioner’s Office

Monday, November 1, 2021

Supreme Court Courtroom, State Capitol Building, Second Floor

 

Dennis Sershen, Respondent vs. Metropolitan Council, self-insured, Relator, and Streater, Inc., and Minnesota Insurance Guaranty Association, Respondents – Case No. A21-0893: Respondent Dennis Sershen filed a claim against his former employers and their insurers, seeking medical expenses and permanent partial disability benefits due to his loss of hearing due to workplace noise. Sershen entered into Pierringer settlements with some of his early employers; a hearing was held on Sershen’s claims against the remaining parties, including the Metropolitan Council.

 

A compensation judge found that Sershen’s exposure to workplace noise was a substantial contributing factor to his permanent hearing loss, but Sershen’s last significant exposure to workplace noise occurred before he was employed by Metropolitan Council. Because the last exposure was at Metropolitan Council, the compensation judge ordered that employer to pay Sershen’s medical expenses. All other issues were deemed moot. Metropolitan Council appealed and the workers compensation court of appeals affirmed.

 

On appeal to the supreme court, the issues presented are whether the compensation judge correctly determined that Sershen’s hearing loss was caused by workplace noise and that Metropolitan Council is liable for Sershen’s medical expenses. (Workers Compensation Court of Appeals)

 

Nonoral: James Senftner, Relator vs. Bimbo Bakeries USA, Inc., and ACE USA, Respondents – Case No. A21-0702: Relator James Senftner filed a claim against his employer and its insurer, respondents Bimbo Bakeries USA and ACE USA, seeking benefits based on a condition in his knees developed from long-term impact in the workplace (Gillette injury).

 

A compensation judge found that Senftner’s knee condition constituted a Gillette injury but denied his claim based on Senftner’s failure to comply with the notice requirements under Minn. Stat. § 176.141 (2020). Senftner appealed and the workers compensation court of appeals affirmed.

 

On appeal to the supreme court, the issues presented are whether the compensation judge correctly determined the commencement date of the Gillette injury and whether Senftner failed to give timely notice of the injury to his employer. (Workers Compensation Court of Appeals)

 

Tuesday, November 2, 2021

Supreme Court Courtroom, State Capitol Building, Second Floor

 

Nonoral: Michael D. Warhol, Respondent vs. Corexpo, Inc. and Berkley Risk Administrators, Relators, and Corexpo, Inc. and Travelers Group, Respondents – Case No. A21-0670: Respondent Michael Warhol injured his neck at his workplace in 2002. His employer and its insurer, relators Corexpo Inc. and Berkley Risk Administrators, accepted liability and paid various benefits, including medical expenses.

 

Due to chronic pain, Warhol was certified to participate in the medical marijuana program. Warhol filed an initial claim petition for reimbursement, also asserting a consequential psychological injury; he later filed an amended claim petition, asserting a separate consequential injury and requesting reimbursement for medical marijuana. Corexpo objected to medical marijuana treatment and asked for an independent psychological exam for the consequential psychological injury claimed by Warhol.

 

A compensation judge found Corexpo’s request for the independent exam to be untimely and denied a separate motion for a continuance. After a hearing, the compensation judge upheld Warhol’s consequential injuries claim and ordered Corexpo to pay for the medical marijuana treatment. Corexpo appealed and the workers compensation court of appeals affirmed.

 

On appeal to the supreme court, the issues are whether the compensation judge correctly upheld Warhol’s claim for consequential injuries, found Corexpo’s request for an independent exam untimely and continuance unnecessary, and ordered Corexpo to pay for the medical marijuana treatment. (Workers Compensation Court of Appeals)

 

Nonoral: John Steven Martin, Appellant vs. State of Minnesota, Respondent – Case No. A21-0386: In 1999, appellant John Martin was convicted of first-degree murder; his conviction was affirmed on appeal. See State v. Martin, 614 N.W.2d 214 (Minn. 2000).

In 2007, Martin filed a postconviction petition for relief, which was denied by the district court and affirmed on appeal. See Martin v. State, 748 N.W.2d 294 (Minn. 2008).

In 2021, Martin filed another petition for postconviction relief asserting several claims, including lack of subject matter jurisdiction, newly discovered evidence, and prosecutorial misconduct. The district court found that the claims are time-barred under Minn. Stat. § 590.01, subd. 4 (2020), and denied the petition.

 

On appeal to the supreme court, the issue is whether the claims raised in Martin’s second petition for postconviction relief are time-barred. (Carlton County)

 

Wednesday, November 3, 2021

Supreme Court Courtroom, State Capitol Building, Second Floor

 

Nonoral: Deborah Leadens, Relator vs. Diversified Distributors and Minnesota Insurance Guaranty Association, Respondents – Case No. A21-0890: Relator Deborah Leadens injured her knee at her workplace in 1979. Her employer and its insurer, respondents Diversified Distributors and Minnesota Insurance Guaranty Association, accepted liability and paid various benefits, including medical expenses and permanent partial disability.

 

In 1998, Leadens entered into a stipulation for settlement to release all claims against Diversified Distributors except for future medical expenses directly related to the injury. A compensation judge approved the settlement and issued the monetary award.

 

In 2020, Leadens filed a petition asking to have the stipulation for settlement vacated for cause under Minn. Stat. § 176.461 (2020) because she did not anticipate her need for additional knee replacements and another back surgery. The workers compensation court of appeals determined that Leadens failed to establish good cause to vacate the stipulation for settlement.

 

On appeal to the supreme court, the issues are whether the workers compensation court of appeals correctly denied the request to vacate the stipulation for settlement and whether the petition should have been remanded to a compensation judge for review. (Workers Compensation Court of Appeals)

 

Tuesday, November 9, 2021

Supreme Court Courtroom, State Capitol Building, Second Floor

 

State of Minnesota, Respondent vs. Devon James Pulczinski, Appellant – Case No. A21-0065: In June 2019, Appellant Devon Pulczinski was indicted by a grand jury with charges for first-degree murder, second-degree murder, and first-degree arson based on allegations that he and another adult male killed an adult female and then started her apartment on fire. The case proceeded to a jury trial in September 2020, and the district court imposed procedural restrictions based on the statewide order governing judicial branch operations during the COVID-19 pandemic, including closing the courtroom to the public. The jury found Pulczinski guilty of all three charges. Pulczinski filed a motion for a Schwartz hearing based on alleged juror misconduct. The district court denied the motion and sentenced Pulczinski to life in prison without the possibility of release.

On appeal to the supreme court, the issues are whether the district court violated Pulczinki’s constitutional right to a public trial by closing the courtroom to the public during his jury trial and whether the district court committed a reversible error by denying Pulczinski’s motion for a Schwartz hearing. (Pennington County)

 

In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Peter Gilbert Lennington, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 0223311 – Case No. A21-0254: An attorney discipline matter that presents the question of what discipline, if any, is appropriate based on the facts of the case.