Minnesota Statutes
Minn. Stat. § 268.17 (2026)
[Repealed]
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
[Renumbered 268.192]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases, 1951–1995 · leading case: Shoreline Cmty. Coll. Dist. No. 7 v. Emp. Sec. Dep't, 842 P.2d 938 (Wash. 1993).
Shoreline Cmty. Coll. Dist. No. 7 v. Emp. Sec. Dep't, 842 P.2d 938 (Wash. 1993). “1987) (construing Minn. Stat. § 268.17 (1986)); Johns-Manville Prods.”
Bergseth v. Zinsmaster Baking Co., 89 N.W.2d 172 (Minn. 1958). “Nor does § 268.17, subd. 1, stand in the way of the pension provision of the contract here under consideration.”
Johnson v. Ford Motor Co., 184 N.W.2d 786 (Minn. 1971). “” The other key statutory provision involved in this case is § 268.17, subd. 1, which provides in part: “Any agreement by an individual to waive, release, or commute his rights to benefits or any other rights under sections 268.”
Jackson v. Minneapolis-Honeywell Regulator Co., 47 N.W.2d 449 (Minn. 1951). “The director gives § 268.17, subd. 1, as another reason for making his decision.”
In Re Procter, 186 B.R. 466 (Bankr. D. Minn. 1995). “175 (2)); unemployment compensation (Minn.Stat. § 268.17(2)); crime victim’s compensation (Minn.”
Brunello v. Mill City Auto Body, 348 N.W.2d 409 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984). “The Commissioner’s representative indicated that the testimony of the two parties was disregarded as false and possibly the product of an agreement between the parties in violation of Minn. Stat. § 268.17 , subd. 1: Waiver of rights void.”
Busch v. Reserve Mining Co., 415 N.W.2d 892 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). “We conclude that the implementation of the parties’ agreement which would in effect allow two weeks of Busch’s vacation pay to offset four weeks of unemployment benefits is not only unfair, but is also void.”
— Minn. Stat. § 268.17(2) — 1 case
In Re Procter, 186 B.R. 466 (Bankr. D. Minn. 1995). “175 (2)); unemployment compensation (Minn.Stat. § 268.17(2)); crime victim’s compensation (Minn.”
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.