Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Mattson v. Abate, 156 N.W.2d 738.

39 citing documents.

Hudson v. Trillium Staffing 896 N.W.2d 536 Minn. 2017
Hudson v. Trillium Staffing 896 N.W.2d 536 Minn. 2017
Even though the WCCA has “considerable latitude” in making its decision, Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287 , it does not have “unlimited discretion,” and we will review the medical record to ensure that the statutory standard has been satisfied.
Monson v. White Bear Mitsubishi 663 N.W.2d 534 Minn. 2003
Monson v. White Bear Mitsubishi 663 N.W.2d 534 Minn. 2003
Professor Larson believes the sounder approach is that in Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287 , a case in which the parties to the settlement had, on the basis of an erroneous medical opinion, anticipated that the employee could soon return to some type of employment.
Black v. Honeywell, Inc. 551 N.W.2d 486 Minn. 1996
Black v. Honeywell, Inc. 551 N.W.2d 486 Minn. 1996
Creamery Ass’n, (quoting Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287, 292 , ), where the medical records reflect little change in diagnosis or ability to work since the 1991 settlement.
Stewart v. Rahr Malting Co. 435 N.W.2d 538 Minn. 1989
Stewart v. Rahr Malting Co. 435 N.W.2d 538 Minn. 1989
Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287, 292
Krebsbach v. LAKE LILLIAN CO-OP. CREAM. ASS'N 350 N.W.2d 349 Minn. 1984
Krebsbach v. LAKE LILLIAN CO-OP. CREAM. ASS'N 350 N.W.2d 349 Minn. 1984
Bennett, supra, quoting Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287, 292
Napper v. Boise Cascade Corp. 348 N.W.2d 81 Minn. 1984
Napper v. Boise Cascade Corp. 348 N.W.2d 81 Minn. 1984
E.g., Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287 , Walker v. Midwest Foods, 293 Minn. 460
Heath v. Airtex Industries 297 N.W.2d 269 Minn. 1980
Heath v. Airtex Industries 297 N.W.2d 269 Minn. 1980
Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287, 292
Maurer v. Braun's Locker Plant 298 N.W.2d 439 Minn. 1980
Maurer v. Braun's Locker Plant 298 N.W.2d 439 Minn. 1980
The Court of Appeals has broad discretion in deciding whether to vacate an award, and its authority has been repeatedly referred to by this court as being “instinct with considerable latitude.” E. g., Bennett v. Hoiseth Motor Sales, 302 Minn. 534, 535 , Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287, 292
Alexander v. Kenneth R. LaLonde Enterprises 288 N.W.2d 18 Minn. 1980
Alexander v. Kenneth R. LaLonde Enterprises 288 N.W.2d 18 Minn. 1980
Walker v. Midwest Foods, 293 Minn. 460 , Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287
Landon v. Donovan Construction Co. 270 N.W.2d 15 Minn. 1978
Landon v. Donovan Construction Co. 270 N.W.2d 15 Minn. 1978
Moreover, we have recognized that the discretion of the court of appeals, although not without limit, is “instinct with considerable latitude.” Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287, 292 , Elsenpeter v. Potvin, supra.
Lubinski v. Bros., Inc. 270 N.W.2d 874 Minn. 1978
Eigen v. Food Producers, Inc. 240 N.W.2d 559 Minn. 1976
Eigen v. Food Producers, Inc. 240 N.W.2d 559 Minn. 1976
Wollschlager v. Standard Const. Co. 300 Minn. 550 , Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287
Hill v. Conroy Bros. Co., Inc. 237 N.W.2d 606 Minn. 1975
Hill v. Conroy Bros. Co., Inc. 237 N.W.2d 606 Minn. 1975
We feel that the commission’s action in this case is consistent with the basic statutory objective for which their discretion is invested, i, e., “to assure a compensation proportionate to the degree and duration of disability.” Elsenpeter v. Potvin, 213 Minn. 129, 132 , Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287, 292
Bohnhoff v. ALLAN ENGINEERING COMPANY 231 N.W.2d 554 Minn. 1975
Bohnhoff v. ALLAN ENGINEERING COMPANY 231 N.W.2d 554 Minn. 1975
Wollschlager v. Standard Const. Co. 300 Minn. 550 , Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287
Bennett v. Hoiseth Motor Sales 224 N.W.2d 148 Minn. 1974
Bennett v. Hoiseth Motor Sales 224 N.W.2d 148 Minn. 1974
Wollschlager v. Standard Const. Co. 300 Minn. 550 , Walker v. Midwest Foods, 293 Minn. 460 , Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287 , Elsenpeter v. Potvin, 213 Minn. 129 , 3 Larson, Workmen’s Compensation, §§ 81.31 to 81.33.
Wollschlager v. STANDARD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 220 N.W.2d 346 Minn. 1974
Wollschlager v. STANDARD CONSTRUCTION COMPANY 220 N.W.2d 346 Minn. 1974
Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287
Sandal v. TALLMAN OIL COMPANY 214 N.W.2d 691 Minn. 1974
Sandal v. TALLMAN OIL COMPANY 214 N.W.2d 691 Minn. 1974
And as we said in [Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287, 292 , ] : “ ‘* * * The basic statutory objective for which this discretion is invested is “to assure a compensation proportionate to the degree and duration of disability.” Elsenpeter v. Potvin, 213 Minn. 129, 132 , 5 N. W. (2d) 499, 501 .
Turner v. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis 213 N.W.2d 414 Minn. 1973
Turner v. Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis 213 N.W.2d 414 Minn. 1973
Elsenpeter v. Potvin, 213 Minn. 129 , Bomersine v. Armour & Co. 225 Minn. 157 , 30 N. W. *167 2d 526 (1947); Dudansky v. L. H. Sault Const. Co. 244 Minn. 369 , Jacobson v. Uptown Transfer & Storage Co. 268 Minn. 336 , Jones v. Flour City Ornamental Iron Works, 271 Minn. 42 , Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287 , Radzak v. Mercy Hospital, 291 Minn. 189 , and Walker v. Midwest Foods, 293 Minn. 460
Walker v. Midwest Foods 197 N.W.2d 430 Minn. 1972
Walker v. Midwest Foods 197 N.W.2d 430 Minn. 1972
Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287 , Bomersine v. Armour & Co. 225 Minn. 157
Schoepke v. Alexander Smith & Sons Carpet Co. 187 N.W.2d 133 Minn. 1971
Schoepke v. Alexander Smith & Sons Carpet Co. 187 N.W.2d 133 Minn. 1971
Mattson v. Abate, 279 Minn. 287 , 156 N. W. (2d) 738 .