McConville v. City of St. Paul
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1DissentGardebring, Justice
I respectfully dissent. This case requires us to consider the relationship of two provisions of the Workers’ Compensation Act, Minn.Stat. § 176.011, subd. 16, which provides coverage for injuries sustained by an employee during transportation to and from the place of employment, if that transportation is regularly furnished by the employer, and Minn.Stat. § 176.021, subd. 9, which precludes coverage for injuries incurred while participating in a voluntary recreation program sponsored by the employer.
As a general rule, an injury occurring on the employer’s premises while the employee *233is going…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Gibberd Ex Rel. Gibberd v. Control Data Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Starrett v. Pier FoundrySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
- Lehn v. KladtSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Raymond v. Osseo/Brooklyn School Bus Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1990