Minnesota Supreme Court, 1986

Gonsior v. Alternative Staffing, Inc.

Gonsior v. Alternative Staffing, Inc.
Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided March 21, 1986 · Amdahl
383 N.W.2d 654; 1986 Minn. LEXIS 746 (North Western Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Kevin Snell, Minneapolis, for Alternative Staffing., Peter C. Andrews, St. Paul, for Dept, of Economic Sec.

Can I rely on this case?

Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.

(as of 9/30/2026)

Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 2000, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.

Cites Minnesota statutes amended since this decision

Amendment history from the Minnesota Revisor of Statutes. A later amendment does not necessarily affect this decision's analysis — check the current statute text.

Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error

Gonsior v. Alternative Staffing, Inc.

Minnesota statutes cited

Sections of the Minnesota Statutes this opinion cites.

Cases that cite this one

5 later published cases cite this decision.

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

AMDAHL, Chief Justice.

Petitioner Donna Mae Gonsior seeks further review of an order of the Court of Appeals discharging a writ of certiorari issued to review orders of the Commissioner of Economic Security in an unemployment compensation matter. The writ was discharged on the ground that, although a timely writ had issued, only an unsigned writ was served on the commissioner within 30 days after mailing notice of the decision of the department.

Minn.R.Civ.App.P. 115.01 provides in part as follows:

Review by the Court of Appeals of decisions of the Commissioner of Economic Security * * * may be had by securing issuance of a writ of certiorari within 30 days after the date of mailing notice of the decision * * *.

Rule 115.03, subd. 4, provides in part as follows:

The petitioner shall serve copies of the petition and writ upon the court or body to whom it is directed and upon any party within 30 days after the date of mailing notice of the decision to the petitioner * * *.

The statute applicable to unemployment compensation matters provides in part as follows:

Any decision of the commissioner may be reviewed on certiorari by the court of appeals provided a petition for the writ is filed and served upon the adverse party or parties within 30 days after the date of mailing notice of any decision to him at his last known address.

Minn.Stat. § 268.10, subd. 8 (1984).

In this case, the record reveals that the decision of the Commissioner of Economic Security sought to be reviewed was filed and mailed on May 28, 1985. The petition for the writ of certiorari was served on the commissioner on June 26 and the writ was issued on June 26, both within 30 days of the mailed notice of the decision sought to be reviewed. The actual signed writ issued by the Clerk of the Appellate Courts was mailed to the appropriate parties upon receipt by petitioner’s counsel but beyond the 30-day period.

While the better practice would be, of course, to serve the issued writ within the 30-day period, we conclude that the procedure here employed by counsel was within the applicable statute and rules and jurisdiction properly vested in the Court of Appeals. We caution the practicing bar that this interpretation is limited to the unique statutory scheme of unemployment compensation law and that different procedures and statutory requirements exist for other areas of the law in which the issuance of a writ of certiorari is the method for obtaining judicial review.

The petition for review is therefore granted and the order of the Court of Ap *656 peals discharging the writ of certiorari is reversed. The matter is remanded to the Court of Appeals for further proceedings on the merits.

Petition granted; reversed and remanded.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.