Ali M. Shire v. Rosemount, Inc., Self-Insured/Berkley Risk Administrators Company, LLC, Relators, and Twin Cities Orthopedics, P.A., Crosstown Surgery Center, and Minnesota Department of Human Services/BRS, Intervenors.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1DissentAnderson, Justice
The word “voluntary,”- as used in the voluntary-recreational-program exception, Minn.Stat. § 176.021, stibd. 9 (2014), is unambiguous and has one reasonable plain meaning. But that reasonable plain meaning is not followed by the court’s decision. Under the court’s definition, a program is “voluntary” only if it is attended “willingly and without constraint or expectation of reward.” And as applied by the court, the alternatives to program attendance provided by Rosemount — taking paid leave or unpaid leave — are “constraints” on “pay or benefits” such that attendance is involuntary. This is…
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Brady v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- Colorado v. SpringSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Deal v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
- Taniguchi v. Kan Pacific Saipan, Ltd.Supreme Court of the United States · 2012
- Carcieri v. SalazarSupreme Court of the United States · 2009
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.