EN BANC CALENDAR

Before the Minnesota Supreme Court
September 2006
SUMMARY OF ISSUES
Summaries prepared by the Supreme Court Commissioner’s Office

 
            In re State of Minnesota, Petitioner.  State of Minnesota, Respondent vs. Beth Luann Hart, Appellant – Case No. A05-2066:  Charges against appellant Beth Luann Hart were dismissed by the district court after the state failed to appear at an evidentiary hearing.  After the district court declined to allow the state to file a new complaint against Hart, the state petitioned the court of appeals for a writ of mandamus to compel the district court to allow the filing of the new complaint.  The court of appeals granted the petition for writ of mandamus and vacated the district court’s order dismissing the original charges against Hart.  At issue are:  (1) whether the state gave proper notice to Hart of its intention to seek a writ of mandamus; and (2) whether the court of appeals had jurisdiction to vacate the district court’s order dismissing the charges, where the state did not appeal directly from the order itself.  (On appeal from Mille Lacs County District Court.)

            Bob Makor George, as Trustee for the Heirs of Gonkartee Dekpah II, deceased, Appellant vs. Estate of Dennis Allen Baker, et al., Respondents, CRST Incorporated, et al., Respondents – Case No. A05-108:  Gonkartee Dekpah II, a Liberian immigrant who had lived in the U.S. for six years, was a passenger in a taxicab driven by Dennis Allen Baker when both were killed in a collision with a truck.  A jury found both Baker and the truck driver were negligent and awarded damages to Dekpah’s heirs of $68,000, but also found that neither Baker’s negligence nor the negligence of the truck driver was a direct cause of the accident.  At issue on appeal are:  (1) whether the matter should be remanded to the district court for a new trial due to various evidentiary errors; and (2) whether the district court erred in instructing the jury that, in calculating any damages awarded to Dekpah, it could consider that males in Liberia have shorter life expectancies than males in the United States.  (On appeal from Hennepin County District Court.)
 

            In the Matter of the Application for PERA Police and Fire Plan Line of Duty Disability Benefits of Stephen Brittain – Case No. A04-2407:  The Board of Trustees of the Public Employees Retirement Association appeals from an opinion of the court of appeals reversing the board’s decision not to award respondent Stephen Brittain “duty-related” disability benefits.  At issue is whether Brittain’s depression, the result of Brittain’s perception that his supervisor was hostile toward him, was incurred in or arose out of “any act of duty.”  (On appeal from the Public Employees Retirement Association Board of Trustees.)
 
            NONORAL:  Commandeur LLC, et al., Appellants vs. Howard Hartry, Inc., Respondent – Case No. A05-2014:  Appellants Commandeur, LLC and ACRO Business Finance Corporation filed a notice of appeal with the court of appeals on Tuesday, October 11, 2005, from judgment entered in the district court on August 10, 2005.  The appeal was dismissed by the court of appeals as untimely because Sunday, October 9, 2005, was the 60th day after entry of judgment.  At issue is whether Columbus Day, which fell on Monday, October 10, in 2005, and on which the United States Post Office is closed but Minnesota courts are open, is a “legal holiday” under the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure and the Minnesota Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure.  (On appeal from Hennepin County District Court.)
 

            Croixdale, Inc., Relator vs. County of Washington, Respondent – Case No. A06-153:  Relator Croixdale, Inc., which owns and operates a senior housing facility in Bayport, Minnesota, appeals from a decision of the Minnesota Tax Court denying it a property tax exemption for its assisted living unit.  At issue is whether Croixdale qualifies as an “institution[] of purely public charity” which, under Minn. Stat. § 272.02, subd. 7 (2004), is exempt from property taxes.  (On appeal from Minnesota Tax Court.)
 
            State of Minnesota, Appellant vs. Daniel Leslie Maurstad, Respondent – Case No. A04-1000:  On appeal from respondent Daniel Leslie Maurstad’s sentence for controlled substance crime, appellant State of Minnesota presents the following issues:  (1) whether the right to challenge an error in calculation of a defendant’s criminal history score is waived, or forfeited under plain error analysis, by failure to object before or at the time of sentencing; and (2) whether the trial court erred by assigning a custody status point in calculating Maurstad’s criminal history score.  (On appeal from Polk County District Court.)
 

            In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Daniel J. Moulton, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 136888 – Case No. A05-1865:  An attorney discipline matter that presents the issue of what discipline, if any, is appropriate based upon the facts of the matter.

            In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Peter Mayrand, a Minnesota Attorney, Registration No. 69206 – Case No. A04-1704:  An attorney discipline matter that presents the issue of what discipline, if any, is appropriate based upon the facts of the matter.

            NONORAL:  Otha Eric Townsend, petitioner, Appellant vs. State of Minnesota, Respondent – Case No. A06-45:  On appeal from the denial of his third petition for postconviction relief following his conviction of first-degree murder, appellant pro se Otha Eric Townsend presents the following issues for review:  (1) whether the district court erred in failing to rule on Townsend’s motion to dismiss the indictment against him because one of the members of the grand jury that indicted him was a potential witness in the case; (2) whether the indictment adequately informed Townsend of the charges against him; (3) whether the prosecution committed misconduct in referring in closing argument to Townsend’s attempt to murder a second person; (4) whether the district court erred in not requiring the jury, after it had returned a verdict of guilty of murder in the first degree, to reach a verdict on the second count of murder in the second degree; and (5) whether the district court erred in denying Townsend’s petition for postconviction relief without an evidentiary hearing.  (On appeal from Ramsey County District Court.)
 

 
            State of Minnesota, Respondent vs. Daniel Joseph Melde, Appellant – Case No. A05-1553 and State of Minnesota, Respondent vs. Alan J. Myers, Appellant – Case No. A05-1604:  Each of these cases, consolidated for argument, presents the question of whether the Minnesota Implied Consent Advisory, Minn. Stat. § 169A.51, subd. 2 (2004), violates a driver’s procedural due process rights because it fails to notify the driver that refusal to submit to chemical testing is a more serious offense than failing the chemical test itself.  (On appeal from Hennepin County District Court (Melde) and from Cass County District Court (Myers).)