Minnesota Statutes
Minn. Stat. § 176.241 (2026)
[Repealed]
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
[Repealed, 1987 c 332 s 117]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases, 1959–1988 · leading case: Springborg v. WILSON & CO. INC., 95 N.W.2d 598 (Minn. 1959).
Springborg v. WILSON & CO. INC., 95 N.W.2d 598 (Minn. 1959). “The commission found, as the only ground for the imposition of a penalty, the discontinuance of payments upon notice pursuant to § 176.241. The evidence in the record before us fails to support any finding on the other grounds alleged in employee's petition.”
Violette v. Midwest Printing Co.-Webb Publ'g, 415 N.W.2d 318 (Minn. 1987). “Minn.Stat. § 176.241 (1982). An aggrieved employee could then object to discontinuance and request a hearing before a compensation judge.”
Woelfel v. Plastics, Inc., 371 N.W.2d 215 (Minn. 1985). “Employee sought review of a decision of the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals affirming a compensation judge’s determination that the employer-insurer’s notice of intention to discontinue compensation benefits filed in May 1981 had not complied with Minn.Stat. § 176.241…”
Kulenkamp v. Timesavers, Inc., 420 N.W.2d 891 (Minn. 1988). “Minn.Stat. §§ 176.241, subd. 3a and 176.242, subd.”
Kurrell v. Nat'l Con Rod, Inc., 322 N.W.2d 199 (Minn. 1982). “Kurrell argues in response that the legal determination of eligibility for benefits is more properly left to a decisionmaker with legal training. Other benefits awarded under the Workers’ Compensation Act can be terminated only pursuant to an order of a Workers’ Compensation…”
Wagner v. Farmer's Union Cent. Exch., 329 N.W.2d 801 (Minn. 1983). “When the employer determines that the disability is not a result of a personal injury, payment of compensation may be discontinued upon notice of discontinuance pursuant to section 176.241. Upon the determination, payments made may be recovered by the employer if the…”
Scott v. Kirk Minnesota Co., 135 N.W.2d 31 (Minn. 1965). “We are of the opinion that § 176.241 has no application where the employee has returned to work and compensation has therefore been discontinued.”
Ansari v. Harold Chevrolet, Inc., 336 N.W.2d 276 (Minn. 1983). “The record discloses, however, that the insurer discontinued payment of benefits on December 10,1980, but did not file a notice of discontinuance pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 176.241 (1980) until January 5,1981.”
Kulenkamp v. Pauline's of Shelard, 388 N.W.2d 745 (Minn. 1986). “On March 12, 1984, the respondents filed a petition to discontinue benefits pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 176.241, subd. 3b (1984). They also sought allowance of a credit against any future claims employee might have for the benefits they had paid her subsequent to December 16, 1983.”
Robinson v. Minnesota Valley Improvement Co., 401 N.W.2d 68 (Minn. 1987). “A notice of intention to discontinue pursuant to section 176.241 was the proper way to terminate or modify benefits being paid pursuant to an “open award” such as the award under the stipulation in this case.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.