Pathmanathan v. St. Cloud State University
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
LANSING, Judge.
This is an action under the Minnesota government data practices act, Minn.Stat. §§ 13.01-.90 (1990), to compel disclosure of information gathered by a government agency during a background investigation conducted in connection with an employment application. The trial court granted summary judgment on the request for a complete, unedited copy of the material in the agency’s physical possession, but denied access to the materials retained by the investigator. We conclude that the physical possession distinction is not recognized by the statute and the undisputed facts…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Forsham v. HarrisSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- Becker v. Alloy Hardfacing & Engineering Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
- Doe v. Minnesota State Board of Medical ExaminersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- Kugling v. WilliamsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1950
3Cited by6 opinions
- County of Dakota (CP 46-06) v. LakevilleCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1997
- Kobluk v. University of MinnesotaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1997
- Lenz v. Depositors Insurance Co.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1997
- Star Tribune v. City of St. PaulCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2003
- In re the Welfare of L.G.S.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1997
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.