Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Chellson v. State Division of Employment & Security, 8 N.W.2d 42.

66 citing documents.

Frandrup v. Pine Bend Warehouse 531 N.W.2d 886 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
Frandrup v. Pine Bend Warehouse 531 N.W.2d 886 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
and Chellson v. State, Div. of Employment & Sec., 214 Minn. 332, 335
Tuff v. Knitcraft Corp. 526 N.W.2d 50 Minn. 1995
Tuff v. Knitcraft Corp. 526 N.W.2d 50 Minn. 1995
In Chellson v. Division of Employment and Sec., 214 Minn. 332 , we held that the applicable standard of review is “whether there is reasonable support in the evidence to sustain the decision of the director [now commissioner] rather than the decision of the appeal tribunal [now referee].” 214 Minn. at 335 , d at 44 ; White v. Metropolitan Medical Ctr.
Weaver v. Minnesota Valley Laboratories, Inc. 470 N.W.2d 131 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Weaver v. Minnesota Valley Laboratories, Inc. 470 N.W.2d 131 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
See Chellson v. State Div. of Employment & Sec., 214 Minn. 332, 335
Heaser v. Lerch, Bates & Associates Inc. 467 N.W.2d 833 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Heaser v. Lerch, Bates & Associates Inc. 467 N.W.2d 833 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
See Chellson v. State Division of Employment & Security, 214 Minn. 332, 335
Markel v. City of Circle Pines 465 N.W.2d 408 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Markel v. City of Circle Pines 465 N.W.2d 408 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
13, 1985) (citing Chellson v. State Div. of Employment & Sec., 214 Minn. 332, 335 , ).
Meehan v. Lull Corp. 466 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Meehan v. Lull Corp. 466 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
13, 1985) (citing Chellson v. State Division of Employment & Security, 214 Minn. 332, 335 , ).
Beaver Creek Mutual Insurance Co. v. Commissioner of Jobs & Training 463 N.W.2d 535 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Beaver Creek Mutual Insurance Co. v. Commissioner of Jobs & Training 463 N.W.2d 535 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
On appeal, we will review the Commissioner’s representative’s decision, rather than the referee’s. Chellson v. State Division of Employment and Security, 214 Minn. 332, 335
Tru-Stone Corp. v. Gutzkow 400 N.W.2d 836 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Tru-Stone Corp. v. Gutzkow 400 N.W.2d 836 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Chellson v. State Div. of Employment and Security, 214 Minn. 332, 336
Morrison County Soil & Water Conservation District v. Armstrong 394 N.W.2d 184 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Morrison County Soil & Water Conservation District v. Armstrong 394 N.W.2d 184 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Chellson v. State Division of Employment and Security, 214 Minn. 332, 336
Wise v. Denesen Insulation Co. 387 N.W.2d 477 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Wise v. Denesen Insulation Co. 387 N.W.2d 477 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
(citing Chellson v. State Div. of Employment Security, 214 Minn. 332, 335 , ).
Dean v. Allied Aviation Fueling Co. 381 N.W.2d 80 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Dean v. Allied Aviation Fueling Co. 381 N.W.2d 80 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Chellson v. State Division of Employment and Security, 214 Minn. 332, 335
McKee v. Cub Foods, Inc. 380 N.W.2d 233 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
McKee v. Cub Foods, Inc. 380 N.W.2d 233 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Chellson v. State Division of Employment and Security, 214 Minn. 332, 336
Winkler v. Park Refuse Service, Inc. 361 N.W.2d 120 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Winkler v. Park Refuse Service, Inc. 361 N.W.2d 120 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
The test on appeal is “whether there is reasonable evidence in the record to sustain the decision of the [Commissioner] rather than the [referee].” Chellson v. State Division of Employment and Security, 214 Minn. 332, 335
Nelson v. Bemidji Regional Interdistrict Council 359 N.W.2d 38 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Nelson v. Bemidji Regional Interdistrict Council 359 N.W.2d 38 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
See Chellson v. State Division of Employment Security, 214 Minn. 332, 335
Tester v. Jefferson Lines 358 N.W.2d 143 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Tester v. Jefferson Lines 358 N.W.2d 143 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
In Chellson v. State Division of Employment and Security, 214 Minn. 332 , the Minnesota Supreme Court held: [T]he test on this appeal is whether there is reasonable support in the evidence to sustain the decision of the Director rather than the decision of the appeal tribunal * * * [T]he final administrative authority has the power to review the evidence and make its o
Forsberg v. Depth of Field/Fabrics 347 N.W.2d 284 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Forsberg v. Depth of Field/Fabrics 347 N.W.2d 284 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Chellson v. State, Div. of Employment and Security, 214 Minn. 332, 336
Schmidt v. City of Duluth 346 N.W.2d 671 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Schmidt v. City of Duluth 346 N.W.2d 671 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
The court’s inquiry is limited to “whether the evidence was such that the [Commissioner] might reasonably make the order or determination which it made.” Chellson v. State Division of Employment Security, 214 Minn. 332, 336
Kahnke Bros., Inc. v. Darnall 346 N.W.2d 194 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Kahnke Bros., Inc. v. Darnall 346 N.W.2d 194 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
ANALYSIS On review of the decision of the Department the court’s inquiry is restricted to “whether the evidence was such that the [Commissioner] might reasonably make the order or determination which it made.” Chellson v. State Division of Employment Security, 214 Minn. 332, 336
Ramirez v. Metro Waste Control Commission 340 N.W.2d 355 Minn. Ct. App. 1983
Ramirez v. Metro Waste Control Commission 340 N.W.2d 355 Minn. Ct. App. 1983
See also Booher v. Transport Clearings of Twin Cities, Inc., Chellson v. State Division of Employment and Security, 214 Minn. 332, 335
Sarja v. Iron Range Resources & Rehabilitation 144 N.W.2d 377 Minn. 1966
Sarja v. Iron Range Resources & Rehabilitation 144 N.W.2d 377 Minn. 1966
Chellson v. State Div. of Employment & Security, 214 Minn. 332 , 8 N. W. (2d) 42 .
Olson v. Starkey 107 N.W.2d 386 Minn. 1961
Olson v. Starkey 107 N.W.2d 386 Minn. 1961
Hamlin v. The Coolerator Co. 227 Minn. 437 , 35 N. W. (2d) 616 ; Chellson v. State Div. of Employment & Security, 214 Minn. 332 , 8 N. W. (2d) 42 ; Honeymead Products Co. v. Christgau, 234 Minn. 108 , 47 N. W. (2d) 754 .
Hessler v. American Television & Radio Co. 104 N.W.2d 876 Minn. 1960
Hessler v. American Television & Radio Co. 104 N.W.2d 876 Minn. 1960
Cases that pertain to scope of review of administrative orders and determinations are Honeymead Products Co. v. Christgau, 234 Minn. 108 , 47 N. W. (2d) 754 ; Hamlin v. The Coolerator Co. 227 Minn. 437 , 35 N. W. (2d) 616 ; Bowman v. Troy Launderers & Cleaners, Inc. 215 Minn. 226 , 9 N. W. (2d) 506 ; Chellson v. State Div. of Employment and Security, 214 Minn. 332 , 8 N. W. (2d) 42 ; State ex rel.
Department of Employment Security v. Minnesota Drug Products, Inc. 104 N.W.2d 640 Minn. 1960
Department of Employment Security v. Minnesota Drug Products, Inc. 104 N.W.2d 640 Minn. 1960
8 Nyberg v. R. N. Cardozo & Brother, Inc. 243 Minn. 361 , 67 N. W. (2d) 821 ; Chellson v. State Div. of Employment & Security, 214 Minn. 332 , 8 N. W. (2d) 42 .
Minnesota State Federation of Labor v. Land O' Lakes Creameries, Inc. 79 N.W.2d 366 Minn. 1956
Minnesota State Federation of Labor v. Land O' Lakes Creameries, Inc. 79 N.W.2d 366 Minn. 1956
1 Honeymead Products Co. v. Christgau, 234 Minn. 108 , 47 N. W. (2d) 754 ; Chellson v. State Div. of Employment & Security, 214 Minn. 332 , 8 N. W. (2d) 42 ; State ex rel.
Oliver Iron Mining Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation 76 N.W.2d 107 Minn. 1956
Oliver Iron Mining Co. v. Commissioner of Taxation 76 N.W.2d 107 Minn. 1956
214 Minn. 332 , 8 N. W. (2d) 42 ; Bowman v. Troy Launderers & Cleaners, Inc. 215 Minn. 226 , 9 N. W. (2d) 506 .