Legal Opinion · Dissent

Michael Harlow v. State of Minnesota Department of Human Services

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided August 10, 2016No. A14-1342Published

1DissentAnderson, Justice

I join in Part I of the court’s opinion regarding the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act. I also agree with the court’s conclusion in Part II of its opinion that David Proffitt is not entitled to absolute privilege, and the court’s corollary decision to remand the case for the court of appeals to determine whether a qualified privilege shields Proffitt from liability in this case. I do not agree, however, with the court’s decision to provide Deputy Commissioner Anne Barry with an absolute privilege. The court’s opinion represents a significant and unprecedented extension of absolute…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Barr v. MatteoSupreme Court of the United States · 1959
  2. Matthis v. KennedySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
  3. Johnson v. DirkswagerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  4. Carradine v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
  5. Zutz v. NelsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010

3 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