Pacyga v. FMC Corp.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
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
- Roberts v. Motor Cargo, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1960
- Arouni v. Kelleher Construction, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- French v. Minnesota Cash RegisterSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Owens v. Pako Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1986
- Wesley v. City of Detroit LakesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.