Koch v. Arnesen
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1DissentYetka, Justice
I respectfully dissent. We have consistently held that this court will not sit as a trier of fact and will uphold findings made below if supported by credible evidence. See e.g., Kahn v. State, 289 N.W.2d 737 (Minn.1980); Norby v. Arctic Enterprises, Inc., 305 Minn. 519, 232 N.W.2d 773 (1975); MacNamara v. Boyd Trust, 287 Minn. 163, 177 N.W.2d 398 (1970). The instant case primarily concerned evaluation of the credibility of the employee. This is the function of the Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals. Madrigal v. Seeley, 281 N.W.2d 366 (Minn.1979). In such situations, we should defer to…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Kahn v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- Boldt v. Jostens, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- MacNamara v. Boyd TrustSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1970
- Norby v. Arctic Enterprises, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1975
- Bushnell v. City of DuluthSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1954
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.