Legal Opinion
Smith v. Carver Cnty.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided July 17, 2019No. A19-0199PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
THISSEN, Justice.
*392This case requires us to interpret a 2013 amendment to the Minnesota Workers' Compensation Act, Minn. Stat. §§ 176.001 -.862 (2018), which expanded the Act to allow injured workers to recover workers' compensation benefits for post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) that arises out of and in the course of employment. The amendment permits recovery for a "mental impairment," see Minn. Stat. § 176.011, subd. 16, defined as "a diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder by a licensed psychiatrist or psychologist," id. , subd. 15(d). " '[P]ost-traumatic stress disorder' means the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Youngberg v. Romeo Ex Rel. RomeoSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- State of Minnesota v. Brandon Wayne RiggsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
- Jarvis v. LevineSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Schuette v. City of HutchinsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2014
- Todd v. Eitel HospitalSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- Janine Tea v. Ramsey County, Self-Insured, RelatorSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2024
- Lucas Peterson, Respondent, vs. City of Minneapolis, Self-Insured, RelatorSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2025
- Nicholas Rowe v. City of Minneapolis, Self-Insured, RelatorSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2026