Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Cybyske v. Independent School District No. 196, Rosemount-Apple Valley

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided April 6, 1984No. C9-83-593Published

1ConcurrenceWahl, Justice

I cannot agree that plaintiff Lynne Cy-byske does not have a cause of action for marital status discrimination under the Minnesota Human Rights Act. To so hold is to significantly narrow the broad construction we gave “marital status” discrimination in Kraft, Inc. v. State, 284 N.W.2d 386 (Minn.1979). We recognized in Kraft that “[b]y including marital status within the parameters of the Human Rights Act, the legislature clearly intended to outlaw arbitrary classifications relating to marriage.” 284 N.W.2d at 388. We found further that, in acknowledging the fundamental nature of the marriage…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Continental Can Co. Ex Rel. Wilson v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
  2. Manhattan Pizza Hut, Inc. v. New York State Human Rights Appeal BoardNew York Court of Appeals · 1980
  3. City of Minneapolis v. RichardsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
  4. Kraft, Inc. v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
  5. City of Minneapolis v. State Ex Rel. WilsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981

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