Minnesota Supreme Court, 2009

Marshall v. STEINBRECHER PAINTING, INC.

Marshall v. STEINBRECHER PAINTING, INC.
Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided January 28, 2009 · Eric J. Magnuson
759 N.W.2d 891; 2009 Minn. LEXIS 26; 2009 WL 261497 (North Western Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

T. Michael Kilbury, Peterson, Logren & Kilbury, P.A., St. Paul, MN, for relators., Lori Swanson, Atty. Gen., Rory H. Foley, Asst. Atty. Gen., St. Paul, MN, for respondent.

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 2009, 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

Marshall v. STEINBRECHER PAINTING, INC.

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites 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

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 August 26, 2008, 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).

BY THE COURT:

/s/Eric J. Magnuson Chief Justice

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