Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc., 729 N.W.2d 23.

64 citing documents.

Aaron Thevenot v. Joseph Companies, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
7(d)(3), (6) (2024); see also Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc., (rejecting argument that the ULJ did not conduct a fair hearing when it did not elicit testimony the relator felt should have been put into evidence because the ULJ gave the relator the opportunity to provide testimony, cross- examine witnesses, and give a closing statement).
Renae Lynn Hagen v. Coast to Coast Logistics, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
4 (2024); see also Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Kirstin Arneson v. St Cloud Auto Sales.Com LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Kirstin Arneson v. St Cloud Auto Sales.Com LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
4(1) (2024); see also Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Noelle Erling v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Noelle Erling v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Tamer K. Embaby v. Department of Treasury, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Tamer K. Embaby v. Department of Treasury, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
4(1) (2024); see also Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Philljeral Glekiah v. Echosphere, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Minn. R. 3310.2921 (2023); Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Valerie Coykendall v. EquiMed Corporation, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Valerie Coykendall v. EquiMed Corporation, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2025
4(1) (2024); see also Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Teresa McDonald v. Monarch Bus Service, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“Whether an employee engaged in employment misconduct presents a mixed question of law and fact.” Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc., McDonald also argues that the “inadverten[ce]” exception and the “single incident exception” apply.
Trenton Fulghum v. Horizon Equipment, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Robert Salvaggio v. Prominent Technology, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2025
7(d)(3)-(6) (2022); see also Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Vangyi Chongtoua v. Bdote Learning Center, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2025
4(1) (2024); see also Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Gregory M. Reinert v. Fairview Health Services, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Rachel Royer v. Inventiv Health, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Justin D. Shackelford v. University of Minnesota, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Grp., d 328, 332 (Minn. App. 2009) (quoting Skarhus v. Davanni’s Inc., ); see also Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc., d 23, 29 (Minn. App. 2007) (remanding “[b]ecause the ULJ did not make findings addressing credibility and the ULJ’s finding of employment misconduct relies on a credibility assessment”).
Pamela Wilhelm v. Fairview Health Services, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Ywswf v. Teleplan Wireless Servs., Inc., 31–33 (Minn. App. 2007); Wichmann v. Travalia
Cleo K. Clemmer v. The Cook Hospital, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2022
7(d)(3), (6) ; see also Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc
Brandon L. Siems v. Courtesy Corporation - McDonald’s, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2022
4(1) (2020); see also Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Travis Pioske v. Pizza Luce VII, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2022
“An employer has the right to establish and enforce reasonable rules governing absences from work.” Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Cassandra Ferdig v. Northwestern Minnesota Juvenile Center, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2022
See Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc. , (holding an employer may establish and enforce reasonable rules governing employee absences); d 813, 815 (Minn. App. 1984) (holding an employer “has a right to expect an employee to 1 See Emerg Exec.
Antonio Johnson v. Fitness International LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2022
7(d)(3), (6) (2020); see also Wichmann v. Trav alia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Edward Curtis, Jr. v. ARG Resources LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2021
7(d)(3), (6) (2020); see also Wichmann v. Travalia & US. Directives, Inc., � 27 (Minn. App. 2007).
Myisha Jackson v. Senior Care Solutions, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“When assessing witness credibility, the ULJ may consider all relevant factors, including, but not limited to, the witness’s interest in the case’s outcome, the source of the witness ’s information, the witness ’s demeanor and experience, and the reasonableness of the witness’s testimony.” Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Kristin K. Choronzy v. Viracon, Inc. (1995) (Joint Account), Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“An employer has the right to establish and enforce reasonable rules governing absences from work.” Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Tina Bell v. Compassioncare Services, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Dennis Leinen v. Hiawatha Reddy Rents, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2018
of Minn. Physician’s Corp., (remanding for additiona l development of th e record on issue impacting eligibility); Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc ., (remanding for additional findings on credibility); see also State ex rel.
Anthony Browne v. M. A. Mortenson Company, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“When assessing witness credibility, the ULJ may consider all relevant factors, including, but not limited to, the witness’s interest in the case’s outcome, the source of the witness’s information, the witness’s demeanor and experience, and the reasonableness of the witness’s testimony.” Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Julie Schwantes v. Northwest Packaging, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Nse Umana v. FedEx Ground Package System, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“When assessing witness credibility, the ULJ may consider all relevant factors, including, but not limited to, the witness’s interest in the case’s outcome, the source of the witness’s information, the witness’s demeanor and experience, and the reasonableness of the witness’s testimony.” Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
John W. Cook v. Pelican Biothermal, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Helen Brown v. PDR Administrative Services, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“An employer has the right to establish and enforce reasonable rules governing absences from work.” Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Deborah Hagen v. Family Focused Recovery Services, PLLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Deborah Hagen v. Family Focused Recovery Services, PLLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Second, in Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc., the ULJ made findings concerning the underlying facts but did not make any credibility determinations.
Angela M. Schroeder v. Angel Eyes, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Angela M. Schroeder v. Angel Eyes, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives
Betty D. Tuolee v. BKD Employee Services, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Betty D. Tuolee v. BKD Employee Services, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Crystal Sayen v. North Hennepin Community College, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Kelly Elizabeth Nolan v. Great River Federal Credit Union, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Kelly Elizabeth Nolan v. Great River Federal Credit Union, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Compare Skarhus v. Davanni’s Inc., (stating that “[c]redibility determinations are the exclusive province of the ULJ and will not be disturbed on appeal”) with Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc., (stating that the ULJ’s credibility determinations will be upheld if supported by substantial evidence) (citing Ywswf v. Teleplan Wireless Servs., Inc., -33 (Minn. App. 2007) (upholding a ULJ’s credibility determination after subjecting it to substantial evidence review)).
Crystal Sayen v. North Hennepin Community College, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
A ULJ should conduct an evidentiary hearing as an “evidence-gathering inquiry, without regard to a burden of proof” and “must ensure that all relevant facts are clearly and fully developed.” Minn. R. 3310.2921 (Supp. 2014); see also Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. 8 Directives, Inc., Ywswf v. Teleplan Wireless Servs., Inc.
Tiffany Montgomery v. AT & T Mobility Services, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Tiffany Montgomery v. AT & T Mobility Services, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Where, as here, credibility is central to the ULJ’s decision, the ULJ is required to “make credibility findings and to ‘set out the reason for crediting or discrediting’ the contested testimony.” Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc., (quoting Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd.
Janvier LeViege v. U.S. Postal Service (FIC 732/Dest 1), Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Janvier LeViege v. U.S. Postal Service (FIC 732/Dest 1), Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“An employer has the right to establish and enforce reasonable rules governing absences from work.” Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc.
Dan Delk, III v. Pan-O-Gold Baking Co. (Corp.), Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Dan Delk, III v. Pan-O-Gold Baking Co. (Corp.), Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
See Wichmann v. Travalia & U.S. Directives, Inc., (concluding that credibility 5 has a significant effect on the decision when the ULJ’s misconduct determination rests on disputed testimony).