Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Minnesota opinions name it 1 courts 2014–2026 3 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Minnesota courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Skarhus v. Davanni's Inc.green2 sentences2026“We view the ULJ’s factual findings in the light most favorable to the decision, giving deference to the credibility determinations made by the ULJ, . . . [and] we will not disturb the ULJ’s factual findings when the evidence substantially sustains them.” Skarhus v. Davanni’s Inc., 721 N.W.2d 340, 344 (Minn. App. 2006) (citations omitted). 2016We defer to a ULJ’s credibility determinations, Skarhus, 721 N.W.2d at 344 , and will affirm if the ULJ “provide[s] the statutorily required reason for [his] credibility determination,” see Ywswf v. Teleplan Wireless Servs., Inc., 726 N.W.2d 525, 533 (Minn. App. 2007). | 2 | 3 |
Ywswf v. Teleplan Wireless Services, Inc.green2 sentences2016We defer to a ULJ’s credibility determinations, Skarhus, 721 N.W.2d at 344 , and will affirm if the ULJ “provide[s] the statutorily required reason for [his] credibility determination,” see Ywswf v. Teleplan Wireless Servs., Inc., 726 N.W.2d 525, 533 (Minn. App. 2007). 2015This court gives deference to a ULJ’s credibility determinations, Skarhus v. Davanni’s Inc., 721 N.W.2d 340, 344 (Minn. App. 2006), and will affirm if “[t]he ULJ’s findings are supported by substantial evidence and provide the statutorily required reason for her credibility determination,” Ywswf v. Teleplan Wireless Servs., Inc., 726 N.W.2d 525, 533-34 (Minn. App. 2007). | 2 | 2 |
Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.green2 sentences2026An appellate court “will uphold a ULJ’s credibility determinations if supported by substantial evidence.” Wichmann, 729 N.W.2d at 29 . 2014If the ULJ fails to make the required credibility determinations, we will “remand for additional findings that satisfy the statute.” Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc., 729 N.W.2d 23, 29 (Minn. App. 2007). 4 Here, the ULJ made the required findings regarding his credibility determinations: To the extent that the parties disagreed, the testimony of Jacobson was more credible because it was reasonable and detailed, internally consistent and persuasive. | 1 | 2 |
BANGTSON v. Allina Medical Groupgreen1 sentence2026Grp., 766 N.W.2d 328, 332 (Minn. App. 2009) (quotation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.