Minnesota Supreme Court, 2010

Tambornino v. Health Risk Management

Tambornino v. Health Risk Management
Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided August 25, 2010 · Stras
787 N.W.2d 540; 2010 Minn. LEXIS 531; 2010 WL 3431872 (North Western Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Thomas D. Mottaz, David B. Kempston, Law Office of Thomas D. Mottaz, Coon Rapids, MN, for respondent., Brad M. Delger, Aafedt, Forde, Gray, Monson & Hager, P.A., Minneapolis, MN, for relators.

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 2017, 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

Tambornino v. Health Risk Management

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

787 N.W.2d 540 (2010)

Shannon M. TAMBORNINO, Respondent,
v.
HEALTH RISK MANAGEMENT, and Kemper Insurance Companies/Broadspire Services, Relators.

No. A10-695.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

August 25, 2010.

Thomas D. Mottaz, David B. Kempston, Law Office of Thomas D. Mottaz, Coon Rapids, MN, for respondent.

Brad M. Delger, Aafedt, Forde, Gray, Monson & Hager, P.A., Minneapolis, MN, for relators.

Considered and decided by the court without oral argument.

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 March 18, 2010, 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:

/s/Lorie S. Gildea Chief Justice

*541 STRAS, J. (dissenting).

I respectfully dissent from the summary affirmance in this case because I would have preferred to schedule the case for oral argument given the submissions of the parties.

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