Legal Opinion
Karst v. FC Hayer Co., Inc.
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided November 3, 1989No. CX-88-1044PublishedCited by 34 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
YETKA, Justice.
Appellant, F.C. Hayer Co., Inc. (hereinafter “Hayer”), has petitioned this court for review of a decision by the Minnesota Court of Appeals holding that the exclusive remedy provision of the Workers’ Compensation Act does not bar the same employee awarded workers’ compensation benefits from bringing a disability action under the Minnesota Human Rights Act on the grounds that his employer has refused to rehire him. 429 N.W.2d 318 (Minn.App. 1988) We reverse the court of appeals and hold that the action under the Human Rights Act is barred by the exclusive remedy provision…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- A. J. Chromy Construction Co. v. Commercial Mechanical Services, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- Breimhorst v. BeckmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1949
- Anderson v. Hunter, Keith, Marshall & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- Danek v. Meldrum Manufacturing & Engineering Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- State Ex Rel. Cooper v. Hennepin CountySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by34 opinions
- Williams v. St. Paul Ramsey Medical Center, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1996
- Kelly Renee Neumann v. At & T Communications, Inc., Kelly Renee Neumann v. At & T Communications, Inc., a Delaware Corporation Gates McDonald Co., an Ohio CorporationCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2004
- Benson v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1997
- MT Properties, Inc. v. CMC Real Estate Corp.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1992
- Gluba Ex Rel. Gluba v. Bitzan & Ohren MasonrySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
29 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.