Legal Opinion · Dissent

Dykhoff v. Xcel Energy

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided December 26, 2013No. A12-2324Published

1DissentPage, Justice

The court’s decision to deny relator Toni Dykhoff s claim for workers’ compensation is based on the flawed conclusion that she must show that her workplace exposed her to an increased risk of injury. Such a conclusion is not grounded in our case law, is contrary to the plain language of Minn. Stat. § 176.021, subd. 1 (2012), defies fundamental principles of fairness, and will significantly reduce employees’ ability to recover workers’ compensation benefits in the State of Minnesota for the large category of workplace injuries in which the source of the injury is unknown. Finally, the court’s…

2Cases cited18 opinions

  1. Rohmiller v. HartSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
  2. Foley v. Honeywell, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
  3. Gibberd Ex Rel. Gibberd v. Control Data Corp.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
  4. Franke v. Fabcon, Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
  5. Locke v. County of SteeleSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1947

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API