Legal Opinion
Cox v. Crown CoCo, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided March 5, 1996No. C2-95-1834PublishedCited by 13 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
NORTON, Judge.
Appellants challenge a judgment holding them liable for retaliatory discharge and defamation. The trial court denied appellants’ motion for judgment notwithstanding the vei’dict or a new trial. We affirm.
FACTS
Respondent Sally Cox brought this action against her former employer, appellant Crown CoCo, Inc., and her former supervisor, appellant Alice Lindstrom, alleging retaliatory discharge and defamation. Cox alleged that her discharge violated the Minnesota whistleblower statute and the
Minnesota Occupational Safety and Health Act. See Minn.Stat. §§ 181.932…
2Cases cited30 opinions
- McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Hubbard v. United Press International, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- Stuempges v. Parke, Davis & Co.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
- Wirig v. Kinney Shoe Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
- Gruenhagen v. LarsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
25 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Abraham v. County of HennepinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
- Duxbury v. Spex Feeds, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004
- Benson v. Northwest Airlines, Inc.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 1997
- Walker v. Wanner Engineering, Inc.District Court, D. Minnesota · 2012
- Boelter v. City of Coon RapidsDistrict Court, D. Minnesota · 1999
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.