Skelley v. Lucent Technologies
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 2006, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Cases that cite this one
1 later published case cites this decision.
- In RE DISCIPLINARY ACTION AGAINST DeVAUGHN (Minn. 2006)
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
*928 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 June 27, 2006, be, and the same is, affirmed without opinion. See Hoff v. Kempton, 317 N.W.2d 361, 366 (Minn. 1982) (explaining that, [s]ummary affirmances have no precedential value because they do not commit the court to any particular point of view, doing no more than establishing the law of the case).
Employee is awarded $1,200 in attorney fees.
BY THE COURT:
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.