Conaway v. St. Louis County
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MINGE, Judge.
In challenging summary judgment, appellant argues that the district court erred in determining that respondent is entitled to continued health-insurance coverage under Minn.Stat. § 299A.465 (2004) because (1) respondent began suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder before the statute became effective, and the statute cannot be applied retroactively; (2) Minn.Stat. § 299A.411 (2004) provides the only benefits for a peace officer disabled by post-traumatic stress disorder; and (3) respondent is not disabled, as defined by Minn. Stat. § 299A.465, or there is at least a…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Summers v. R & D AGENCY, INC.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1999
- Nash v. WollanCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2003
- Kasch v. Clearwater CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- Mid-City Hotel Associates v. Hennepin County Board of CommissionersCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1994
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. KilmerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2007
- Amundson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2006