Legal Opinion
Baufield v. Safelite Glass Corp.
District Court, D. Minnesota
Decided May 10, 1993No. Civ. 3-91-214PublishedCited by 16 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
KYLE, District Judge.
Introduction
The above-entitled action came on for trial before the undersigned and a jury between March 8 and March 12,1993. 1 On March 15, 1993, the jury returned a verdict finding that defendant Safelite Glass Corporation (“Safe-lite”) terminated. plaintiff Kurt Baufield in violation of Minn.-Stat. § 181.932 (1990) (the “Whistleblower Act”), and was liable for def amation. By its order dated March 16,1993, this Court concluded that Safelite had engaged in reprisal discrimination against Baufield in violation of the Minnesota Human Rights Act.…
2Cases cited36 opinions
- Hensley v. EckerhartSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Blum v. StensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Alyeska Pipeline Service Co. v. Wilderness SocietySupreme Court of the United States · 1975
- Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens' Council for Clean AirSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- Pennsylvania v. Delaware Valley Citizens' Council for Clean AirSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
31 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- Phelps v. Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
- Jassmine D. Adams v. Toyota Motor CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2017
- Richie v. Paramount Pictures Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1996
- Sherman v. KasotakisDistrict Court, N.D. Iowa · 2004
- Longbehn v. SchoenrockCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2007
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.