Legal Opinion · Dissent

Lubinski v. Bros., Inc.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 28, 1978No. 48150Published

1DissentKelly, Justice

By reason of Minn.St. 176.141 and 176.-521, subd. 3, the compensation court may vacate an award based on a settlement “for cause.” We have held that “cause” exists in cases involving (a) fraud, (b) mistake, (c) newly discovered evidence, and (d) substantial change in the employee’s condition. Wollschlager v. Standard Const. Co., 300 Minn. 550, 220 N.W.2d 346 (1974). The basic underlying concern in a determination of cause sufficient to set aside an award is “to assure a compensation proportionate to the degree and duration of disability.” Elsenpeter v. Potvin, 213 Minn. 129, 132, 5 N.W.2d…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Mattson v. AbateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1968
  2. Elsenpeter v. PotvinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1942
  3. Wollschlager v. STANDARD CONSTRUCTION COMPANYSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
  4. Bohnhoff v. ALLAN ENGINEERING COMPANYSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API