Ball Ex Rel. Mancino v. Pear One, Inc.
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) Amendment history from the Minnesota Revisor of Statutes. A later amendment does not necessarily affect this decision's analysis — check the current statute text.Cites Minnesota statutes amended since this decision
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Minnesota statutes cited
Sections of the Minnesota Statutes this opinion cites.
Opinion
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 18, 2006, be, and the same is, affirmed without opinion. See Hoff v. Kempton, 317 N.W.2d 361, 366 (Minn. 1982) (explaining that, “[sjummary affirmances have no prece-dential value because they do not commit the court to any particular point of view,” doing no more than establishing the law of the case). We further conclude that relator has not overcome the presumption that Minn.Stat. § 176.183 (2004) is constitutional.
Respondent is awarded $1,200 in attorney fees.
BY THE COURT:
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.