Court of Appeals Digest: June 3, 2019.
Byline: Minnesota Lawyer
Civil Published
Environmental Law
Environmental-Impact Statements
In these consolidated certiorari appeals, relators environmental organizations and tribal bands challenged a decision by respondent Minnesota Public Utilities Commission determining adequate a final environmental-impact statement (EIS) for the proposed Line 3 pipeline project of respondent oil transportation company.
Although the Court of Appeals rejected most of relators' assertions of error, it agreed that the final EIS was inadequate because it did not address the potential impact of an oil spill into the Lake Superior watershed. The court held that (1) in determining the project alternatives to be considered in an EIS under the Minnesota Environmental Policy Act (MEPA), a responsible governmental unit (RGU) does not err by taking the project proposer's objective into consideration when defining the purpose of and need for the project, or by excluding from consideration alternatives that would not meet that objective; (2) an RGU acts in a manner that is arbitrary, capricious, and unsupported by substantial evidence when it determines adequate a final EIS that fails to address potentially significant issues raised during scoping and in public comments on the draft EIS; and (3) MEPA does not require completion of a traditional cultural properties (TCP) survey; an EIS may be determined adequate before a federal TCP survey is complete if the discussion of potential impacts to historic and cultural resources is otherwise sufficient. Reversed and remanded.
A18-1283, A18-1291, A18-1292 In re Applications of Enbridge Energy, Ltd. P'ship (Minn. Pub. Utils. Comm'n)
https://mn.gov/law-library-stat/archive/ctappub/2019/OPa181283-060319.pdf
Firearm Licensure
Crimes of Violence
Appellant challenged a District Court's denial of his petition for a writ of mandamus to compel a county sheriff to issue a permit to carry a pistol, arguing that the court erroneously concluded that his domestic-assault conviction was not expunged under federal law because a District Court expunged it solely under its inherent authority.
The Court of Appeals held that (1) under 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(33)(B)(ii), a person convicted of a "misdemeanor crime of domestic violence," as defined in 18 U.S.C. 921(a)(33)(A), is not considered convicted of such an offense when the conviction is expunged by a District Court under its inherent authority, unless the expungement order expressly provides that the person may not ship, transport, possess, or receive firearms; and (2) a sheriff lacks discretion to deny an applicant a permit to carry under Minn. Stat. 624.713, subd. 1(12), .714, subd. 2(b), on the basis that the applicant's conviction of a misdemeanor domestic assault was expunged solely under a District Court's inherent authority. Reversed and remanded.
A18-1784 Bergman v. Caulk (Isanti County)
https://mn.gov/law-library-stat/archive/ctappub/2019/OPa181784-060319.pdf
Insurance
Bad-Faith Denials
Appellant insurer challenged the District Court's award of taxable costs for bad-faith denial of a first-party insurance claim pursuant to Minn. Stat. 604.18, arguing the District Court misapplied the statute. The Court of Appeals held that, pursuant to Minn. Stat. 604.18, subd. 2(a), an insurer must conduct a reasonable investigation and fairly evaluate the results to have a reasonable basis for denying an insured's first-party insurance-benefits claim. Affirmed.
A18-1081 Peterson v. W. Nat'l Mut. Ins. Co. (Hennepin County)
https://mn.gov/law-library-stat/archive/ctappub/2019/OPa181081-060319.pdf
Public Assistance
Section 8
In this certiorari appeal, relator challenged the decision of a county community development agency to include certain funds that she received as part of a state government program in its calculation of her family's annual income under 24 C.F.R. 5.609 for purposes of determining eligibility for the Section 8 housing choice voucher program.
The Court of Appeals held that only amounts paid by a state agency to offset monetary expenses for services or equipment incurred by a family to keep a developmentally disabled family member living at home are excluded from the calculation of the family's annual income under 24 C.F.R. 5.609(c)(16). Affirmed.
A18-1287 In re Ali (Scott County Cmty. Dev. Agency)
https://mn.gov/law-library-stat/archive/ctappub/2019/OPa181287-060319.pdf
Civil Unpublished
Domestic Relations
Child Protection; Termination of Parental Rights
Appellant-father appealed the termination of his parental rights to his child. The District Court terminated appellant's parental rights based on its findings that he had been convicted of a crime requiring predatory-offender registration, that termination was in...
To continue reading
Request your trial