Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Dourney v. CMAK Corp., 796 N.W.2d 537.

57 citing documents.

Dorothy L. Henschel v. MJ Business Services, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
“Substantial evidence is (1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.” (quotation omitted).
Ann Anderson v. Cooperative Response Center, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Allen Peterson v. Edward R. Shaw, PA, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
“Substantial evidence is (1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.” (quotation omitted).
Muktar M. Mahdi v. Universal Protection Service, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
A ULJ’s decision is supported by substantial evidence when it is based on “(1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.” (quotation omitted).
Andrew Schaffhausen v. Barnett Chrysler-Plymouth, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
We review “factual findings in the light most favorable to the decision.”
Fredric A. Wilson v. Jerry’s Enterprises, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Substantial evidence is “(1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.” (quotation omitted).
Colton Seelye v. Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
’” Dourney v. CMAK Corp. , (quoting Minn. Ctr.
Augustine M. Togba v. Micro Parts, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Substantial evidence means “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” (quotation omitted).
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
Substantial evidence is “(1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.” (quotation omitted).
Kenneth M. Kuller v. TVI, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Kenneth M. Kuller v. TVI, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Cassie McDuffie v. Association of Minnesota Public Educational Radio Stations, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2026
and inconsistent testimonies” and that there are “little to no timestamped records, no formal evaluations or documented disciplinary steps.” Substantial evidence is, among other things, “such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion.” (quotation omitted).
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
Employee Misconduct “Substantial evidence is (1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its 6 entirety.” (quotation omitted).
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
Substantial evidence is “(1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.” (quotation omitted).
Teresa McDonald v. Monarch Bus Service, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2025
that she did not qualify for the mental-health exception was not supported by substantial evidence.2 “Substantial evidence is (1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.” (quotation omitted).
Ger Xiong v. Quality Extrusion, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Ger Xiong v. Quality Extrusion, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Substantial evidence is “(1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.” (quoting Minn. Ctr.
Vangyi Chongtoua v. Bdote Learning Center, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Substantial evidence is “(1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.” (quotation omitted).
Richard Braegelmann v. Hansen Flooring Gallery, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2021
In the context of employment misconduct, we have defined “inadvertence” to mean “an oversight or a slip” or “not duly attentive or marked by unintentional lack of care.” (quotations omitted).
Connie J. Meier v. Steven E. Pierce, CPA, Ltd., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2020
In this context, “inadvertence” means “‘an oversight or a slip ’” or “‘[n]ot duly attentive’ or ‘[m]arked by unintentional lack of care.’” (alterations in original) (quoting The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 910 (3d ed. 1992)).
Erwin Butler v. Mahkahta Trucking, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In the Matter of the Appeal by Eriksmoen Cottages of St. Cloud, LLC (License Nos. 1071214 and 1078291) … Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Substantial evidence ha s been defined as “‘(1) such relevant evidence as a 5 reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.’” (quoting Minn. Ctr.
In the Matter of the Appeal by Open Arms Christian Learning Childhood Center of the Determination of Maltreatment … Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Substantial evidence is: “(1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.” (quotation omitted).
Dawn Johnson v. Dakota County Receiving Center, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2018
’” (alterations in original) (quoting The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language 910 (3d ed. 1992)).
In the Matter of the Maltreatment Determination of Amanda Restorff and the Order to Pay a Fine and … Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Substantial evidence is: “(1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.” (quotation omitted).
Anthony Browne v. M. A. Mortenson Company, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Substantial evidence is defined as “(1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclus ion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.” Dourney v. CMAK Corp. , (quotation omitted).
Fatoumata Kaba v. Commissioner of Health Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Substantial evidence is: “(1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; and (5) evidence considered in its entirety.” Dourney v. CMAK Corp., 4 (quotation omitted).
Shari Flanagan v. Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“Substantial evidence is (1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of ev idence; (3) more th an some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.” Dourney v. CMAK Corp. , (quotation omitted).
Anthony Browne v. M. A. Mortenson Company, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Anthony Browne v. M. A. Mortenson Company, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“Substantial evidence is (1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.” (quotation omitted).
Patti L. Davies v. Donaldson Company, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Patti L. Davies v. Donaldson Company, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“Substantial evidence is (1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.” 3 (quotation omitted).
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
“Substantial evidence is ‘(1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.’” (quoting Minnesota Ctr.
Lucille O’Quinn v. Noodles & Company (Corp.), Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Lucille O’Quinn v. Noodles & Company (Corp.), Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(discussing negligence in the context of section 268.095, 6 subdivision 6(a), defining negligence as “the failure to use the care that a reasonable person would use in the same or similar circumstances” and addressing inadvertence exception to
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
Substantial evidence is defined as “(1) such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion; (2) more than a scintilla of evidence; (3) more than some evidence; (4) more than any evidence; or (5) the evidence considered in its entirety.” (quotation omitted).
Paul C. Stepnes v. HOM Furniture, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Paul C. Stepnes v. HOM Furniture, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“Whether the employee committed a particular act is a fact question, which we review in the light most favorable to the decision and will affirm if supported by substantial evidence.”
Colleen Campbell v. Planned Parenthood of Minnesota (Corp.), Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Colleen Campbell v. Planned Parenthood of Minnesota (Corp.), Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“Whether the employee committed a particular act is a fact question.” d 537, 539 (Minn. App. 2011).
Barbara Jackson v. Direct Home Health Care, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Barbara Jackson v. Direct Home Health Care, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“Substantial evidence” is evidence “a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a 6 conclusion.” (quotation omitted).
Timothy J. Fish v. Young Men’s Christian Association - YMCA Brainerd, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Timothy J. Fish v. Young Men’s Christian Association - YMCA Brainerd, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“Whether the employee committed a particular act is a fact question, which we review in the light most favorable to the decision and will affirm if supported by substantial evidence.”
Pamela Beidel v. Corporate Commission of Mille Lacs Band of Ojibwe Indians - Grand Casino Hinckley, Department of … Minn. Ct. App. 2014