From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Womack v. Fikes of Minnesota

Supreme Court of Minnesota
Dec 13, 2001
636 N.W.2d 795 (Minn. 2001)

Summary

In Womack, the WCCA decided that in cases in which the employee failed to give notice to his employer of the institution of a third-party suit and trial, as required by Minn.Stat. § 176.061, subd. 8a, forfeiture of the statutory one-third of the net verdict was an appropriate penalty.

Summary of this case from Adams v. DSR Sales, Inc.

Opinion

No. C5-01-1644.

Filed: December 13, 2001

Appeal from the Workers' Compensation Court of Appeals, Steven Wheeler, J.

Janet Stellpflug, for relator.

Timothy P. Jung, for employee and intervenor-respondent.

Considered and decided by the court en banc.


ORDER

Based upon all the files, records and proceedings herein,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the decision of the Workers' Compensation Court of Appeals filed September 12, 2001, be, and the same is, affirmed without opinion. See Minn.R.Civ.App.P. 136.01, subd. 1(b).

Employee is awarded $600 in attorney fees.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Paul H. Anderson, Associate Justice


Summaries of

Womack v. Fikes of Minnesota

Supreme Court of Minnesota
Dec 13, 2001
636 N.W.2d 795 (Minn. 2001)

In Womack, the WCCA decided that in cases in which the employee failed to give notice to his employer of the institution of a third-party suit and trial, as required by Minn.Stat. § 176.061, subd. 8a, forfeiture of the statutory one-third of the net verdict was an appropriate penalty.

Summary of this case from Adams v. DSR Sales, Inc.
Case details for

Womack v. Fikes of Minnesota

Case Details

Full title:BENJAMIN B. WOMACK, RESPONDENT, v. FIKES OF MINNESOTA, AND WESTERN…

Court:Supreme Court of Minnesota

Date published: Dec 13, 2001

Citations

636 N.W.2d 795 (Minn. 2001)

Citing Cases

Adams v. DSR Sales, Inc.

Issues still in dispute included whether Milwaukee Insurance/Unitrin was entitled to a subrogation credit…