Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Eley v. Southshore Investments, Inc., 845 N.W.2d 216.

16 citing documents.

Patricia Lemke, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
We defer “to a ULJ’s decision not to hold an additional hearing and will reverse that decision only for an abuse of discretion.” Eley v. Southshore Invs., Inc., (quotation omitted).
Ahmad Daniel, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
See Minn. Stat. § 268.105 (2022) (requiring this court to review the ULJ’s eligibility decision); see also Eley v. Southshore Invs ., Inc., (relying on Thiele v. Stich , and declining to address issues not considered by ULJ ).
Kenneth Kuller, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Eley v. Southshore Invs., Inc. , Skarhus v. Davanni’s Inc.
Robert M. Hall, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
7(a) (2020) (providing that this court reviews “the [ULJ’s] decision on reconsideration”); see also Eley v. Southshore Invs., Inc. , (declining to “consider the merits of DEED’s ineligibility determination” in appeal over good cause for failure to participate).
Jacob Holly, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Eley v. Southshore Invs., Inc.
A19-0384 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“When the credibility of an involved party or witness testifying in an evidentiary hearing has a significant effect on the outcome of a decision, the [ULJ] must set out the reason for crediting or discrediting that testimony .” Eley v. Southshore Invs ., Inc., (quoting Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd.
Tami Kraker, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See Eley v. Southshore Invs., Inc., (explaining that scope of review in appeal from summary dismissal of unemployment-benefits appeal does not extend to underlying eligibility determination).
Richard Thurmer, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Eley v. Southshore Invs., Inc.
Amber McCorison, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Scott Souter, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
See Eley v. Southshore Invs ., Inc., d 216, 222 (Minn. App. 2014) (declining to consider merits of ineligibility determination where ULJ did not consider merits of determination) (d 580, 582 (Minn. 1988) (stating that an appellate court will not consider matters not argued to and considered by the district court)).
Fulisha Fulmer, Relator v. Meridian Behavioral Health, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Fulisha Fulmer, Relator v. Meridian Behavioral Health, LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2017
See Eley v. Southshore Investments, Inc., ( in deciding not to consider issues not raised before the ULJ).
Amy L. Morris, Relator v. Trudeau Foods LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Amy L. Morris, Relator v. Trudeau Foods LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2016
7(d) (2014 and Supp. 2015) (stating that this court may reverse or modify the ULJ’s decision if the findings, inferences, conclusion, or decision are, inter alia, “in excess of the statutory authority or jurisdiction of the department” or “made upon unlawful procedure”); Eley v. Southshore Invs., Inc., (declining to consider the merits of DEED’s determination of ineligibility because the ULJ did not).
Jonathan C. Barnett, Relator v. Soligent Distribution LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Jonathan C. Barnett, Relator v. Soligent Distribution LLC, Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2015
See Eley v. Southshore Invs., Inc., ().