Opinions Archive

 

 2011

Results 1 - 10  (417 total results)

  • 16-1302-21617-1 In the Matter of the Proposed Permanent Rules of the Minnesota Board of Teaching Relating to Special Education Teacher Standards, Chapter 8710
    December 30, 2011 - The Autism Society of Minnesota approached the Board of Teaching (BOT) with concerns about the preparation of teachers who serve students with Autism Spectrum Disorders (ASD). The BOT responded by gathering a cross-section of stakeholders for discussion. The proposed rules are the result of intensive stakeholder driven work that began in 2007. While there was a diversity of opinion as to what should be the response, it became clear that something should be done relative to ASD.
  • 61-1100-22372-2 In the Matter of Alvin B. Herron
    December 30, 2011 - May the Department collect a correctional fee of $300 from Mr. Herron through the Minnesota Revenue Recapture Program?
  • 4-2500-22376-2 In the Matter of the Applications for a Route Permit and Certificate of Need for the 115kV Savanna Rebuild Project
    December 29, 2011 - This matter began on December 29, 2010, when the applicants, Great River Energy and Minnesota Power filed a written notice with the Minnesota Public Utilities Commission of their intent to submit an application for a combined Certificate of Need and Route Permit for the Savanna 115kV Transmission Project.
  • 8-3000-22409-1 In the Matter of the Proposed Expedited Rules Relating to Local State-Aid Route Standards, Chapter 8820
    December 28, 2011 - The rules were adopted in compliance with the procedural requirements of Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 14, and Minnesota Rules, Chapter 1400. The Department has the authority under Minn. Stat. §§ 162.02 and 162.09 to adopt the proposed rules using the expedited rulemaking process. The adopted rules are APPROVED.
  • 58-1800-22344-2 In the Matter of the Revocation of the Adult Foster Care License of Ziola Perra
    December 20, 2011 - Did the Licensee fail to comply with the terms of the conditional license issued pursuant to the Commissioner’s Order of November 6, 2008? Should the Licensee’s adult foster care license be revoked? Based upon these Conclusions, the Administrative Law Judge recommends that the Order of Revocation be RESCINDED.
  • 8-2000-22413-1 In the Matter of the Adopted Exempt Permanent Natural Resources Rules Relating to Aquatic Plant Management Permits, Minnesota Rules, Chapter 6280
    December 19, 2011 - This matter came before Administrative Law Judge Eric L. Lipman upon the application of the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources for a legal review under Minn. Stat. § 14.388 and Minn. R. 1400.2400. On November 9, 2011, the Department filed documents with the Office of Administrative Hearings seeking review and approval of the above-entitled rules.
  • 3-0900-22302-2 Augustana Health Care Center of Apple Valley Survey Exit Date: November 10, 2010
    December 16, 2011 - Resident # 1 did suffer actual harm in the form of subdural and intra-parenchymal bleeding and edema on the left side with a possible occipital skull fracture. She had diminished consciousness for several weeks, and she had pain treated with narcotic medications after this incident. Although the resident eventually did return to her baseline status, the determination of actual harm should be affirmed.
  • 58-3100-22325-2 John M Jacobson and Scott G A Metcalf Petitioners v Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development Respondent
    December 09, 2011 - This case arises out of the State shutdown, which began on July 1, 2011. As of that date, most State employees were laid off. The shutdown occurred because the State had not approved an operating budget for the biennium commencing July 1, 2011. The budget issue was subsequently resolved, and State employees, including the Petitioners, returned to work on July 21, 2011, once funding was approved. The Petitioners are employees of the Department of Employment and Economic Development (the Department) who were laid off during the shutdown. The Petitioners each filed a Petition for Relief under the Minnesota Veterans Preference Act (VPA) regarding the layoff. They contend that they were removed from their jobs within the meaning of the VPA; the shutdown was not done in good faith; and that the Department’s federal funding of their work should have precluded the Petitioners from being laid off.
  • 58-3100-22324-2 Hart, Pommier, and Walsh v MnIron Range Resources and Rehab Board
    December 09, 2011 - This case arises out of the State shutdown, which began on July 1, 2011. As of that date, most State employees were laid off. The shutdown occurred because the State had not approved an operating budget for the biennium commencing July 1, 2011. The budget issue was subsequently resolved, and State employees, including the Petitioners, returned to work on July 21, 2011, once funding was approved. The Petitioners are employees of the Minnesota Iron Range Resources and Rehabilitation Board (the Board) who were laid off during the shutdown. The Petitioners each filed a Petition for Relief under the Minnesota Veterans Preference Act (VPA) regarding their layoffs. The Petitioners contend that the layoffs resulted from the State’s lack of good faith in failing to enact a biennial budget. They also maintain that, because the Board has its own funding source, they should not have been laid off.
  • 58-3100-22323-2 Thomas R. Girard, Bruce M. Schemmel, Joseph A. Schouweiler and Gerald A. Weiss v MN Dept. of Transportation
    December 09, 2011 - This case arises out of the State shutdown, which began on July 1, 2011. As of that date, most State employees were laid off. The shutdown occurred because the State had not approved an operating budget for the biennium commencing July 1, 2011. The budget issue was subsequently resolved, and State employees, including the Petitioners, returned to work on July 21, 2011, once funding was approved. The Petitioners are employees of the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) who were laid off during the shutdown. Each of the Petitioners filed a Petition for Relief under the Minnesota Veterans Preference Act (VPA) regarding their layoffs. They contend that their layoffs resulted from the State’s lack of good faith in failing to enact a biennial budget.
Pages:  1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5  Next