Legal Opinion
In Re the Claim for Benefits by Meuleners
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided December 19, 2006No. A06-14PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
HUDSON, Judge.
On certiorari appeal from the Public Safety Officers Benefit Eligibility Panel’s determination order denying relator’s application for continued employer-provided health-insurance benefits, relator argues that he is entitled to benefits because he suffered a disabling injury that forced him to retire or separate from service as a peace officer and the injury occurred while he was acting in the course and scope of his duties as a peace officer. Because the panel based its decision on factors not relevant to the statutorily required determination of whether the officer’s…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Cable Communications Board v. Nor-West Cable Communications PartnershipSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
- Markwardt v. State, Water Resources BoardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- In Re the Excess Surplus Status of Blue Cross & Blue Shield of MinnesotaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
- In Re the Denial of Eller Media Company's Applications for Outdoor Advertising Device Permits in the City of Mounds ViewSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
- J.C. Penney Co. v. Commissioner of Economic SecurityCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Carlson v. Department of Employment & Economic DevelopmentCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2008
- In Re Enlargement of the Valley Branch Watershed DistrictCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
- In Re the Claim for Benefits by HagertCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2007
- In Re the Temporary Immediate Suspension of the Family Child Care License of StreckerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2010
- Carlson v. DEPT. OF EMPLOY. & ECON. DEV.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2008
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.