Legal Opinion
State, Department of Human Rights v. Hibbing Taconite Co.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided March 17, 1992No. C3-91-1798, C1-91-1816PublishedCited by 3 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
FORSBERG, Judge.
In 1983, respondent State of Minnesota, Department of Human Rights (“Department”) brought this class action against relator Hibbing Taconite Company (“Hib-bing Taconite”), alleging discrimination on the basis of disability. In a decision issued August 16, 1991, an administrative law judge (“AU”) concluded class certification is appropriate here; the pre-1983 disability provisions of the Minnesota Human Rights Act (“Act”) are not unconstitutionally over-broad or void for vagueness; all of the claimants are disabled within the meaning of the Act; Hibbing Taconite was not…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Bucyrus-Erie Co. v. Department of Industry, Labor & Human RelationsWisconsin Supreme Court · 1979
- State Ex Rel. McClure v. Sports & Health Club, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
- State Ex Rel. Cooper v. Hennepin CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- Lundgren v. EustermannSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
- Varice Smith, Jr. v. Olin Chemical CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · 1977
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State Ex Rel. Beaulieu v. ClausenCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992
- Scott v. CSL Plasma, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2015
- State, Department of Human Rights v. Hibbing Taconite Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992