Legal Opinion
Whitaker v. 3M Co.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided April 28, 2009No. A08-0816PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HUDSON, Judge.
Appellant 3M Company challenges the district court’s certification of a class of more than 4,900 current and former 3M employees in this age-discrimination action brought under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA), Minn.Stat. §§ 363A.01-.41 (2008). Because we conclude that the district court did not properly apply the standards for certification under Minnesota Rule of Civil Procedure 23, we reverse and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
FACTS
Respondents, five current and former 3M employees, initiated this action against 3M in 2004, asserting…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
- General Telephone Co. of Southwest v. FalconSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Eisen v. Carlisle & JacquelinSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- In Re Hydrogen Peroxide Antitrust LitigationCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2009
- John D. Szabo, Doing Business as Zatron v. Bridgeport MacHines Inc.Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2001
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Friend v. Gopher Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2009
- Curtis v. Altria Group, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
- Jackson v. Unocal Corp.Colorado Court of Appeals · 2009
- Walsh v. Principal Life InsuranceDistrict Court, S.D. Iowa · 2010
- Vasseei v. Schmitty & Sons School Buses Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.