Legal Opinion · Dissent

Pacyga v. FMC Corp.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 30, 1998No. C5-98-451Published

1DissentPaul H. Anderson, Justice

I respectfully dissent. I would affirm the decision of the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals (WCCA). The majority concludes that this is a case in which the WCCA entered the realm of fact finding by overturn*862ing a compensation judge’s findings of fact that are supported by the record. Unlike the majority, I conclude that the proper focus of this case is upon the WCCA’s conclusion that, as a matter of law, the compensation judge did not properly apply the well-established rule that evidence of actual earnings creates a presumption of earning capacity.1 Here, the compensation judge…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Roberts v. Motor Cargo, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1960
  2. Arouni v. Kelleher Construction, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
  3. French v. Minnesota Cash RegisterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
  4. Owens v. Pako Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
  5. Wesley v. City of Detroit LakesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API