Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Strand v. Special School District No. 1, 392 N.W.2d 881.

57 citing documents.

Hinckley v. School Board of Independent School District No. 2167 678 N.W.2d 485 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Hinckley v. School Board of Independent School District No. 2167 678 N.W.2d 485 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Dist No. 1, to support her position.
Tischer v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority 675 N.W.2d 361 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Tischer v. Housing & Redevelopment Authority 675 N.W.2d 361 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
No. 1, (discussing writ of certiorari issued by district court).
Moe v. Independent School District No. 696, Ely 623 N.W.2d 899 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Moe v. Independent School District No. 696, Ely 623 N.W.2d 899 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
No. 1, (holding that in realignment situations, “the school district’s needs reflecting the welfare of the students and public” must be considered) and Westgard v. Independent Sch.
Shaner v. Independent School District No. 2884 604 N.W.2d 803 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Shaner v. Independent School District No. 2884 604 N.W.2d 803 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Kvernmo v. Independent School District No. 403 541 N.W.2d 620 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
Kvernmo v. Independent School District No. 403 541 N.W.2d 620 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
No. 1, Beste v. Independent Sch.
Micius v. St. Paul City Council 524 N.W.2d 521 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Micius v. St. Paul City Council 524 N.W.2d 521 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
No. 1, see also Dokmo v. Independent Sch.
Township of Honner v. Redwood County 518 N.W.2d 639 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
Township of Honner v. Redwood County 518 N.W.2d 639 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
In re Dallman 470 N.W.2d 148 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
In re Dallman 470 N.W.2d 148 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Brandhorst v. Special School District Number 1 466 N.W.2d 409 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Brandhorst v. Special School District Number 1 466 N.W.2d 409 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Fredrich v. Independent School District No. 720 465 N.W.2d 692 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
In re the Proposed Placement of Hagen 465 N.W.2d 707 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Fredrich v. Independent School District No. 720 465 N.W.2d 692 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Lecy v. Sage Co. 460 N.W.2d 102 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Lecy v. Sage Co. 460 N.W.2d 102 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
§ 181.81 has been applied in cases concerning implementation of a retirement policy, see Strand v. Special School District No. 1, the statute does not express an application only to discharges involving retirement policies, nor is there other evidence of legislative intent to so narrowly limit application of this statute.
Dokmo v. Independent School District No. 11 459 N.W.2d 671 Minn. 1990
Dokmo v. Independent School District No. 11 459 N.W.2d 671 Minn. 1990
Polk County Social Services ex rel. Hagen v. Clinton 459 N.W.2d 362 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Polk County Social Services ex rel. Hagen v. Clinton 459 N.W.2d 362 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
No. 1, -83 (Minn.1986) (where a legislative “oversight” leaves the law “unsettled” and a subsequent amendment corrects the ambiguity, retrospective application of a clarifying statute may be appropriate).
Columbia Heights Federation of Teachers Local 710 v. Independent School District No. 13 457 N.W.2d 775 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Columbia Heights Federation of Teachers Local 710 v. Independent School District No. 13 457 N.W.2d 775 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
See Strand v. Special School District No. 1
In Re the Proposed Placement on Unrequested Leave of Bristol 451 N.W.2d 883 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
In Re the Proposed Placement on Unrequested Leave of Bristol 451 N.W.2d 883 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
The dispute between the parties centers on whether the district is required to make a reasonable realignment of teaching positions as required under the holdings of Strand v. Special School District No. 1, and Westgard v. Independent School District No. 745, pet.
Harms v. Independent School District No. 300 450 N.W.2d 571 Minn. 1990
Harms v. Independent School District No. 300 450 N.W.2d 571 Minn. 1990
No. 1, -86 (Minn.1986), the seniority of teachers being recalled from ULA should be protected by reasonably realigning personnel and positions.
Dokmo v. Independent School District No. 11 443 N.W.2d 231 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Dokmo v. Independent School District No. 11 443 N.W.2d 231 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Strand v. Special School District No. 1, Roseville Education Association v. Independent School District No. 623, Grinolds v. Independent School District No. 597, (Grinolds I); Collins v. Independent School District No. 745
Harms v. Independent School District No. 300 441 N.W.2d 522 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Harms v. Independent School District No. 300 441 N.W.2d 522 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
See Strand v. Special School District No. 1
Nichols v. Borst 439 N.W.2d 432 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Nichols v. Borst 439 N.W.2d 432 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
See Strand v. Special School District No. 1
In Re Independent School District No. 318 Hearing 435 N.W.2d 81 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
In Re Independent School District No. 318 Hearing 435 N.W.2d 81 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
See Strand v. Special School District No. 1, (holding that in realignment situations, “the school district’s needs reflecting the welfare of the students and public” must be considered); Westgard v. Independent School District No. 745
Heruth v. Independent School District No. 11 434 N.W.2d 470 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Destache v. Independent School District No. 832 434 N.W.2d 270 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Destache v. Independent School District No. 832 434 N.W.2d 270 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Strand v. Special School District No. 1
Heruth v. Independent School District No. 11 434 N.W.2d 470 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Heruth and Zauner argue that under the principles of law established in Strand v. Special School District No. 1, and Westgard v. Independent School District No. 745, pet.
In Re the Proposed Placement on Unrequested Leave of Nelson 416 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
In Re the Proposed Placement on Unrequested Leave of Nelson 416 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
In Strand v. Special School District No. 1, the school board placed Arlene Strand, a home economics teacher who was also licensed in child development, on unrequested leave of absence even though Janell Olson, a teacher junior to Strand, was retained to teach child development and as a work experience coordinator.
Mohn v. Independent School District No. 697 416 N.W.2d 494 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Mohn v. Independent School District No. 697 416 N.W.2d 494 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
In Strand v. Special School District No. 1, the court held that “where reassignment or realignment and reassignment is practical and reasonable, a school district is required to reassign teaching duties in a manner designed to continue the employment of senior teachers * * Id.
Collins v. Independent School District No. 745 416 N.W.2d 174 Minn. Ct. App. 1987