Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Berthiaume, 259 N.W.2d 904.

142 citing documents.

Cloquet Education Ass'n v. Independent School District No. 94 344 N.W.2d 416 Minn. 1984
Cloquet Education Ass'n v. Independent School District No. 94 344 N.W.2d 416 Minn. 1984
(1982), the arbitrability issue “is to be determined by ascertaining the intention of the parties from the language of the arbitration agreement itself.”
Woog v. Home Mutual Indemnity Co. 340 N.W.2d 863 Minn. 1983
Woog v. Home Mutual Indemnity Co. 340 N.W.2d 863 Minn. 1983
Myers v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 336 N.W.2d 288 Minn. 1983
Myers v. State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. 336 N.W.2d 288 Minn. 1983
Arbitration Proceeding Between Arrowhead Public Service Union v. City of Duluth 336 N.W.2d 68 Minn. 1983
Arbitration Proceeding Between Arrowhead Public Service Union v. City of Duluth 336 N.W.2d 68 Minn. 1983
Freeman v. Duluth Clinic, Ltd. 334 N.W.2d 626 Minn. 1983
Freeman v. Duluth Clinic, Ltd. 334 N.W.2d 626 Minn. 1983
Thus, we have held, that the court should order arbitration in the first instance, subject to de novo review, if arbitra-bility is reasonably debatable.
Hilltop Construction, Inc. v. Lou Park Apartments 324 N.W.2d 236 Minn. 1982
Hilltop Construction, Inc. v. Lou Park Apartments 324 N.W.2d 236 Minn. 1982
General Drivers, Local 346 v. Aitkin County Board 320 N.W.2d 695 Minn. 1982
General Drivers, Local 346 v. Aitkin County Board 320 N.W.2d 695 Minn. 1982
As we noted in State vs. Berthi-aume, , (Minn.1977), PELRA and the Uniform Arbitration Act are to be construed as consistent with each other.
Minnesota Federation of Teachers, Local 331 v. Independent School District No. 361 310 N.W.2d 482 Minn. 1981
Minnesota Federation of Teachers, Local 331 v. Independent School District No. 361 310 N.W.2d 482 Minn. 1981
In an action to compel or stay arbitration the issue of arbitrability “is to be determined by ascertaining the intention of the parties from the language of the arbitration agreement itself.”
Arbitration Between Ramsey County v. American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, Council 91, Local 8 309 N.W.2d 785 Minn. 1981
Arbitration Between Ramsey County v. American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees, Council 91, Local 8 309 N.W.2d 785 Minn. 1981
Minnesota Education Association v. Independent School District No. 495
Rosenberger v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. 309 N.W.2d 305 Minn. 1981
Rosenberger v. American Family Mutual Insurance Co. 309 N.W.2d 305 Minn. 1981
In State v. Berthiaume, Minn., , we held that such proceedings are de novo; that the trial court is not bound by the arbitrator’s determination; that the objecting party has the burden of proving the invalidity of the arbitrator’s award; and that where the arbitrator has clearly exceeded his powers, the award must be vacated.
Matter of Markley 298 N.W.2d 27 Minn. 1980
Matter of Markley 298 N.W.2d 27 Minn. 1980
we first addressed the question of arbitrability in judicial proceedings to vacate an award on the ground that the arbitrator exceeded his authority in deciding the merits of the dispute and concluded that, as in questions raised pursuant to § 572.09, the issue requires an initial independent judicial reso
Minnesota Education Ass'n v. Independent School District No. 495 290 N.W.2d 627 Minn. 1980
Minnesota Education Ass'n v. Independent School District No. 495 290 N.W.2d 627 Minn. 1980
we held the Uniform Arbitration Act, Minn.Stat.
City of Bloomington v. Local 2828 of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees 290 N.W.2d 598 Minn. 1980
City of Bloomington v. Local 2828 of the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees 290 N.W.2d 598 Minn. 1980
Thus, “[b]y concerning himself with the issue of whether a penalty other than discharge might be appropriate, the arbitrator clearly exceeded his authority and went beyond the sole issue of ‘just cause for discharge.’ ” The Court, being satisfied that the arbitrator herein exceeded his power,”
Crosby-Ironton Federation of Teachers, Local 1325 v. Independent School District No. 182 285 N.W.2d 667 Minn. 1979
Crosby-Ironton Federation of Teachers, Local 1325 v. Independent School District No. 182 285 N.W.2d 667 Minn. 1979
City of Richfield v. Local 1215, International Association of Fire Fighters
Albert Lea Education Ass'n v. Independent School District No. 241 284 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 1979
Albert Lea Education Ass'n v. Independent School District No. 241 284 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 1979
(3) If no agreement to arbitrate exists, either in fact or because the controversy sought to be arbitrated is not within the scope of the arbitration clause of the contract, the court may interfere and protect a party from being compelled to arbitrate (§ 572.09[a, b]).” See, also, Layne-Minnesota Co. v. Regents of University, 266 Minn. 284
City of Richfield v. Local No. 1215, International Ass'n of Fire Fighters 276 N.W.2d 42 Minn. 1979
City of Richfield v. Local No. 1215, International Ass'n of Fire Fighters 276 N.W.2d 42 Minn. 1979
it was held that the Uniform Act applies to a public or private sector collective bargaining agreement containing an arbitration clause, unless the agreement provides otherwise.
City of Brooklyn Center v. Minnesota Teamsters Public & Law Enforcement Employees Union Local No. 320 271 N.W.2d 315 Minn. 1978
City of Brooklyn Center v. Minnesota Teamsters Public & Law Enforcement Employees Union Local No. 320 271 N.W.2d 315 Minn. 1978
State v. Berthiaume, Minn.
Ellerbrock v. Bd. of Ed., Sp. Sch. Dist. No. 6 269 N.W.2d 858 Minn. 1978
Ellerbrock v. Bd. of Ed., Sp. Sch. Dist. No. 6 269 N.W.2d 858 Minn. 1978
State v. Berthiaume, Minn., In re Discharge of Johnson, 288 Minn. 300 , Layne-Minnesota Co. v. Regents of the University, 266 Minn. 284 , ; Minn.St.
Children's Hospital, Inc. v. Minnesota Nurses Ass'n 265 N.W.2d 649 Minn. 1978
Children's Hospital, Inc. v. Minnesota Nurses Ass'n 265 N.W.2d 649 Minn. 1978
State v. Berthiaume, Minn., United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Fruchtman, Minn., ; Nolde Brothers, Inc. v. Local No. 358, Bakery & Confectionery Workers Union, AFL-CIO, 430 U.S. 243, 254 , 97 S.Ct.
Haekenkamp v. Allstate Insurance Co. 265 N.W.2d 821 Minn. 1978
Haekenkamp v. Allstate Insurance Co. 265 N.W.2d 821 Minn. 1978
State v. Berthiaume, Minn., Dunshee v. State Farm Mutual Auto.
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Fruchtman 263 N.W.2d 66 Minn. 1978
United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Fruchtman 263 N.W.2d 66 Minn. 1978
Although the trial court failed to independently determine the issue, as required by State v. Berthiaume, Minn., (filed subsequent to the trial court’s decision), we hold that the coverage dispute was not arbitrable under the policy definition of a “hit-and-run vehicle,” requiring “physical contact” with such vehicle as a precondition to coverage and the unrefuted fact disclosed by the record that there was no such contac