News

A primer on changes wrought in the wake of Justice David Lillehaug’s 2016 article on unpublished appellate decisions.

The Minnesota Supreme Court issued a ruling addressing the significance of a potential intervenor’s decision not to intervene when it received adequate and timely notice of its right to intervene in an employee’s pending proceeding. In Koehnen v. Flagship Marine Company, File No. A20-0053 (August 12, 2020), the Minnesota Supreme Court confirmed that pursuant to Minn. Stat. §§ 176.271, 176.291 and Minn. R. 1420.1850, subp. 3B, when a potential intervenor receives adequate and timely notice of its right to intervene but chooses not to intervene in an employee’s pending proceeding, it can be extinguished by the award on stipulation for settlement and cannot subsequently dispute the award.

On July 29, 2020, the Minnesota Supreme Court released Peterson v. Western National, expanding the scope of what can be first-party bad faith in Minnesota. In the case, Peterson claimed the $250,000 limits of her underinsured motorist (“UIM”) coverage, alleging that a whiplash injury from a motor vehicle accident caused severe headaches that required quarterly Botox injections (a relatively novel treatment). Western National’s last offer before trial was $50,000. A jury awarded Peterson damages over $1.4 million. After trial, Peterson amended her complaint to allege bad faith against Western National. The bad-faith claim was tried to the district court judge who awarded $100,000 in costs and $97,940.50 in attorney fees. Western National appealed.

On August 3, a New York federal district court judge injected a great deal of uncertainty into COVID-19 paid-leave law. The Honorable Judge Paul Oetkein of the Southern District of New York vacated four Families First Coronavirus Response Act (“FFCRA”) regulations in the U.S. Department of Labor’s (“DOL”) Final Rule. The court order impacts regulations that govern the Emergency Family and Medical Leave Expansion Act (“EFMLAEA”) and Emergency Paid Sick Leave Act (“EPSLA”).

On Monday, June 15, the United States Supreme Court ruled that Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which, among other things, prohibits discrimination on the basis of “sex”, forbids employers from discriminating based on sexual orientation and gender identity.

In a decision handed down on June 3, 2020, the Minnesota Supreme Court abolished the common-law prohibition against champerty. Champerty is an agreement to divide litigation proceeds between the owner of the litigated claim and an unrelated party with no bona fide interest in the claim who funds the litigation in whole or in part.

On May 4, 2020 the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry (DLI) announced new Treatment Parameters for work-related post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD).

The authors of this article had the privilege of representing Kraus-Anderson Construction Company ("KA") through the five-year Village Lofts litigation (2015-2020), which recently concluded with a decisive win for the construction industry at the Minnesota Supreme Court.

Arthur, Chapman, Kettering, Smetak & Pikala, P.A. is pleased to announce the addition of attorney Nicholas Strafaccia.

Arthur, Chapman, Kettering, Smetak & Pikala, P.A. has announced the election of Corey S. Bronczyk and Beth A. Prouty as shareholders.

Think MDOLI has settled the issue? Think again. By Sue Conley and Jeff Markowitz | There are times in the law when everyone thinks you’re wrong but you just can’t shake the feeling that you’re right. It is a bit jarring, and it can make you (quite reasonably) second-guess yourself. But you double- and triple-check your facts and the law, take a deep breath, and conclude, yes, I got this right. We respectfully suggest that we are in that situation when it comes to whether, through the 2015 promulgated opioid rules, the Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry (MDOLI)—by defining medical marijuana that is used consistent with Minnesota law as not an “illegal substance”—made such medical marijuana reimbursable through Minnesota workers’ compensation.

Arthur Chapman is pleased to announce its inclusion in the Forbes 2019 list of "America's Top Trusted Corporate Law Firms." Furthermore, the Firm is one of only 29 law firms nationwide - and the only Minnesota based firm - to receive the "most recommended practice area" designation for Labor & Employment.

Supreme Court Addresses PTSD Amendments By Emily A. LaCourse, Noelle L. Schubert, Christine L. Tuft, and James S. Pikala The Minnesota Supreme Court issued a significant ruling on what evidence a compensation judge must consider and what analysis a compensation judge should employ when determining a valid claim for work-related post-traumatic stress disorder ("PTSD").

Arthur Chapman attorney Beth Jenson Prouty obtained affirmance at the Eighth Circuit for her insurer client in the case Restaurant Recycling v. EMC. The opinion reaffirms Minnesota’s plain-meaning application of the Absolute Pollution Exclusion. The opinion applies the “in whole or part” language of the pollution exclusion and also defines the plain-meaning of the word “dispersal.”

On April 24, 2019, the Minnesota Supreme Court issued a decision clarifying employers and insurers’ ability to utilize defenses under the Treatment Parameters. In Johnson, William v. Darchuks Fabrication, Inc., File No. A18-1131 (April 24, 2019), the Minnesota Supreme Court, in a case of first impression, ruled that employers and insurers can apply the Treatment Parameters even when contesting a diagnosis, as long as they do not deny all obligations to pay compensation for the underlying injury.

With 50 lawyers, the firm Arthur, Chapman, Kettering, Smetak & Pikala tied for #18 on Minnesota Lawyer’s recently released list of Minnesota’s Largest Law Firms, 2018. For comparison, the firm moved up from its 2016 ranking when we had 46 lawyers.

Please join us in congratulating Steve Warner on his induction as a member of the American Board of Trial Advocates (ABOTA). Steve joins his partners Sally Ferguson, Colby Lund, Paul Rocheford, Michael Ryan, and Eugene Shermoen in this well respected organization.

By Jeffrey M. Markowitz "Justice delayed is justice denied." That legal maxim recognizes that securing justice eventually is not enough. The injury of delay can deny, or at least diminish, later-secured justice. Often the battle cry of the plaintiff seeking prompt redress, so too may the maxim be the battle cry of the defendant seeking prompt dismissal of a claim destined for a defense judgment. The longer it takes a defendant to march toward justice, the more time, burden, and expense even ordinary litigation will cause. And, particularly if the claim should never have made it past the pleadings stage, every dollar and hour spent in discovery diminishes eventually secured justice.

Minnesota Court of Appeals Holds Joint and Several Liability Statute Does Not Apply to Fault of Employer

Whether you hit a home run in district court, or lost hard, every litigator will repeatedly face the question of whether and how to appeal that shutout, or how to defend that big win. Attorney Jeffrey Markowitz, a former MN Court of Appeals clerk, offers five tips to navigate your next appeal.