§
Subdivision 1.Gross misdemeanor.
Any employer required under the provisions of an agreement to which the employer is a party to pay or provide benefits or wage supplements to employees or to a third party or fund for the benefit of employees, and who refuses to pay the amount or amounts necessary to provide such benefits or furnish such supplements within 30 days after such payments are required to be made under law or under agreement, is guilty of a gross misdemeanor. If such employer is a corporation, any officer who intentionally violates the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a gross misdemeanor. The institution of bankruptcy proceedings according to law shall be a defense to any criminal action under this section.
§
Subd. 2.Benefits or wage supplements defined.
As used in this section, the term "benefits or wage supplements" includes, but is not limited to, reimbursement for expenses; health, welfare, and retirement benefits; and vacation, separation or holiday pay.
Notes of Decisions
Lee v. Fresenius Med. Care, Inc., 741 N.W.2d 117 (Minn. 2007).
· cites it 4× “Minnesota law concerning vacation pay further supports our interpretation of section 181.”
Reisdorf v. 13, LLC, 129 F. Supp. 3d 751 (D. Minnesota 2015).
“13 further provides that “[a]n employee’s demand for payment under this section must be in writing.”
Bailey v. First Transit Inc. (D. Minnesota 2021).
· cites it 4× “In the Report and Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge addressed Plaintiffs’ claims pursuant to: (1) the National Transit Systems Security Act of 2007 (“NTSSA”); (2) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (“Title VI”); (3) Minn. Stat. § 181.74 ; (4) the Federal False Claims…”
Bailey v. First Transit Inc. (D. Minnesota 2021).
“) Plaintiffs also alleged that Defendants violated two additional Minnesota Statutes: Minnesota Statutes §§ 181.74 and 268.095. (See id.) On July 30, 2021, after considering another set of motions to dismiss, the Court recommended that a majority of the claims and Defendants be…”
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.