Legal Opinion

Kahl v. Minnesota Wood Specialty, Inc.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided March 30, 1979No. 48961PublishedCited by 9 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

ROGOSHESKE, Justice.

The narrow issue presented by these proceedings initiated in this court for a writ of prohibition is whether, in a workers’ compensation proceeding to impose a penalty for unreasonably and vexatiously delaying payment pursuant to Minn.St. 176.225, an employer-insurer is precluded from asserting the attorney-client privilege. We hold that the applicable provisions of our workers’ compensation laws do not abrogate the common-law privilege reiterated in § 595.-02(2) and that it may be asserted to prevent disclosure of any communications falling within the purpose and scope of…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. United States v. United Shoe MacHinery CorporationDistrict Court, D. Massachusetts · 1950
  2. Radiant Burners, Inc., an Illinois Corporation v. American Gas Association, Peoples Gas Light and Coke CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1963
  3. Minneapolis Star & Tribune Co. v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority ex rel. City of MinneapolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
  4. Radiant Burners, Inc. v. American Gas AssociationDistrict Court, N.D. Illinois · 1962
  5. Johnson v. IversonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1928

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

3Cited by9 opinions

  1. O'CONNOR v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
  2. State v. Catch the BearSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1984
  3. Leer v. Chicago, Milwaukee, St. Paul & Pacific Railway Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
  4. Kobluk v. University of MinnesotaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
  5. Levin v. C.O.M.B. Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1991

4 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