Legal Opinion

Ray v. Miller Meester Advertising, Inc.

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 29, 2004No. C3-02-1605PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MEYER, Justice.

In this appeal, we are asked to decide whether front pay is subject to multiplication under Minn.Stat. § 363.071, subd. 2 (2002).1

Appellant Miller Meester Advertising, Inc. (MMA), a Minnesota-based advertising agency, hired respondent Patricia Lu-dowese Ray in June of 1996 in the position of Vice President/Group Creative Director. At the time she was hired, Ray had 21 *406years of experience in the advertising industry. In June 1998, after two years of employment and without a negative performance evaluation, Ray was promoted to the position of Creative Director, the first…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. Pollard v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 2001
  2. Feges v. Perkins Restaurants, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
  3. Lawrence J. Mathieu v. Gopher News CompanyCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2001
  4. Phelps v. Commonwealth Land Title Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
  5. Cummings v. KoehnenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Rodd Wagner v. Gallup, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2015
  2. Krueger v. Zeman Construction Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
  3. Poehler v. Cincinnati Insurance Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2017
  4. Friend v. Gopher Co., Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2009
  5. Noske v. FriedbergCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2006

8 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