Legal Opinion

Friedlander v. Edwards Lifesciences, LLC

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided August 9, 2017No. A16-1916PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

GILDEA, Chief Justice.

This case presents a question the United States District Court for the District of Minnesota certified to us. We are asked to decide whether “the 2013 amendment to the Minnesota Whistleblower Act defining the term ‘good faith’ to mean ‘conduct that does not violate section 181.932, subdivision 3’ eliminate[s] the judicially created requirement that the putative whistleblower act with the purpose of ‘exposing an illegality.’ ” Because we conclude that the 2013 amendment abrogates our prior interpretation of “good faith,” we answer the certified question in the…

2Cases cited11 opinions

  1. Obst v. Microtron, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2000
  2. Alice Ann Staab v. Diocese of St. CloudSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2014
  3. Herrly v. MuzikSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
  4. Kidwell v. Sybaritic, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
  5. Braylock v. JessonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012

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

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. Jonathan Scarborough v. Federated Mutual Insurance Co.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2021
  2. Benner v. St. Paul Pub. Sch.District Court, D. Maine · 2019
  3. Kelley v. KaniosDistrict Court, D. Maine · 2019
  4. Scarborough v. Federated Mut. Ins. Co.District Court, D. Maine · 2019
  5. Hansen v. TodnemSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2018

10 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