Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Nelson v. Productive Alternatives, Inc., 715 N.W.2d 452.

44 citing documents.

Laurissa Wredberg, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
The Minnesota whistleblower act “does not preclude common-law wrongful-discharge actions.” Nelson v. Productive Alts., Inc.
Dr. Eric Ringsred, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Nonetheless, “a dismissal must be affirmed if it is clear that no relief can be granted under any set of facts that can be proved consistent with the allegations.” Nelson v. Productive Alternatives, Inc.
Randall Rahn, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Nelson v. Productive Alts., Inc., -55 (Minn. 2006).
Tyler Halva, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Further, in reviewing an order dismissing a claim under rule 12.02, the only issue before this court is whether the pleadings are adequate, and this court will affirm a dismissal “if it is clear that no relief can be granted under any set of facts that can be proved consistent with the allegations.” Nelson v. Productive Alts., Inc.
Cent. Hous. Assocs., LP v. Olson 929 N.W.2d 398 Minn. 2019
Cent. Hous. Assocs., LP v. Olson 929 N.W.2d 398 Minn. 2019
151 (Minn. 2014) (acknowledging that deciding questions of public policy is a role " 'usually better performed by the legislature' " (quoting Nelson v. Productive Alts., Inc. , , 457 n.5 (Minn. 2006) )).
Burt v. Rackner, Inc. 902 N.W.2d 448 Minn. 2017
Burt v. Rackner, Inc. 902 N.W.2d 448 Minn. 2017
Furthermore, our holding today is consistent with our characterization of Minn. Stat. § 181 ,76 (2016), albeit in dictum, in Nelson v. Productive Alts., Inc., , 454 n.1 (Minn. 2006).
State v. Smith 899 N.W.2d 120 Minn. 2017
Todd Burt v. Rackner, Inc. d/b/a Bunny�s Bar & Grill Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Burt v. Rackner, Inc. 882 N.W.2d 627 Minn. 2016
Burt v. Rackner, Inc. 882 N.W.2d 627 Minn. 2016
Our conclusion is reinforced by the Minnesota Supreme Court’s decision in Nelson v. Productive Alternatives, Inc., considering whether the Minnesota Whistleblower Act abrogated the public-policy exception to the at-will doctrine.
Todd Burt v. Rackner, Inc. d/b/a Bunny�s Bar & Grill Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Our conclusion is reinforced by the Minnesota Supreme Court’s decision in Nelson v. Productive Alternatives, Inc., considering whether the Minnesota Whistleblower Act abrogated the public-policy exception to the at-will doctrine.
Teresa McDonald v. Allina Health System d/b/a United Hospital Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Teresa McDonald v. Allina Health System d/b/a United Hospital Minn. Ct. App. 2015
See Nelson v. Productive Alts., Inc., –55 (Minn. 2006) (concluding that public-policy exception provides “a cause of action with continuing 12 viability in the common law” (citing Phipps, d at 571)).
Gieseke v. IDCA, Inc. 844 N.W.2d 210 Minn. 2014
Gieseke v. IDCA, Inc. 844 N.W.2d 210 Minn. 2014
See Nelson v. Productive Alts., Inc.
Dukowitz v. Hannon Security Services 841 N.W.2d 147 Minn. 2014
Dukowitz v. Hannon Security Services 841 N.W.2d 147 Minn. 2014
Dukowitz argues that our decisions in Phipps v. Clark Oil & Refining Corp., and Nelson v. Productive Alternatives, Inc., establish a cause of action for wrongful discharge if an employee can identify a clear mandate of public policy that the employer violated when it discharged the employee.
Schmitz v. United States Steel Corp. 831 N.W.2d 656 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Schmitz v. United States Steel Corp. 831 N.W.2d 656 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Compare Nelson v. Productive Alts., Inc., (dismissing common law wrongful-discharge action because, while the employee was exercising his voting rights as a member of a nonprofit corporation, there was no clear public policy implicated by plaintiffs termination) with Anderson-Johanningmeier v. Mid-Minn.
Sipe v. STS Manufacturing, Inc. 822 N.W.2d 2 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Sipe v. STS Manufacturing, Inc. 822 N.W.2d 2 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Generally, the employee-employer relationship may be terminated at-will “for any reason or for no reason at all,” Nelson v. Productive Alts., Inc., and “[discharge from employment is actionable, if at all, because it constitutes a breach of the employment contract,” (-28 (Minn.1983)).
In re the Estate of Neuman 819 N.W.2d 211 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
In re the Estate of Neuman 819 N.W.2d 211 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Corp., -72 (Minn.1987); see also Nelson v. Productive Alts., Inc., , 457 n. 5 (Minn.2006) (recognizing continued vitality of Minnesota’s common-law claim of wrongful discharge).
Dukowitz v. Hannon Security Services 815 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Dukowitz v. Hannon Security Services 815 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Staab v. Diocese of St. Cloud 813 N.W.2d 68 Minn. 2012
Rohmiller v. Hart 799 N.W.2d 612 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Rohmiller v. Hart 799 N.W.2d 612 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
of Chiropractic Exam’ (applying canon to statutory list of professional services and (applying canon to statute on appointment of public defenders); (applying canon to sentencing guidelines); Nelson v. Productive Alts., Inc., (applying canon to entire chapter of statutes)).
Minnesota Board of Chiropractic Examiners v. Cich 788 N.W.2d 515 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Minnesota Board of Chiropractic Examiners v. Cich 788 N.W.2d 515 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
(applying this canon to the statute authorizing the appointment of public defenders); (applying this canon to the sentencing guidelines); Nelson v. Productive Alts., Inc., , 457 *522 (Minn.2006) (applying this canon to an entire chapter of statutes).
Dahlin v. Kroening 784 N.W.2d 406 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Swanson v. Brewster 784 N.W.2d 264 Minn. 2010
Mountain Peaks Financial Services, Inc. v. Roth-Steffen 778 N.W.2d 380 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Mountain Peaks Financial Services, Inc. v. Roth-Steffen 778 N.W.2d 380 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
748, 760 , 154 L.Ed.2d 653 (2003) (quotation omitted); accord Nelson v. Productive Alternatives, Inc.
State v. Williams 771 N.W.2d 514 Minn. 2009
State v. Williams 771 N.W.2d 514 Minn. 2009
We apply the rules of statutory construction to the sentencing guidelines, including the canon “expressio unius est exclusio alterius.” This canon provides that “the expression of one thing is the exclusion of another.” Nelson v. Productive Alternatives, Inc.
Kratzer v. Welsh Companies, LLC 771 N.W.2d 14 Minn. 2009
Kratzer v. Welsh Companies, LLC 771 N.W.2d 14 Minn. 2009
Nelson v. Productive Alternatives, Inc.
In Re the Welfare of H.A.D. 764 N.W.2d 64 Minn. 2009
In Re the Welfare of H.A.D. 764 N.W.2d 64 Minn. 2009
See Nelson v. Productive Alternatives, Inc., (explaining the canon of statutory construction “ex-pressio unius [est] exclusio alterius,” meaning the expression of one thing is the exclusion of another).
Stone v. Jetmar Properties, LLC 733 N.W.2d 480 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Stone v. Jetmar Properties, LLC 733 N.W.2d 480 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
See Nelson v. Productive Alternatives, Inc., (interpreting question of common law under de novo standard).