§ 122A.40

Minnesota Statutes
Source: 2025 Minnesota Statutes. For the official text, see revisor.mn.gov.

Citing Cases (21)

Minnesota Supreme Court

Cruz-Guzman v. State · 2018 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Emerson v. Board of Independent School District 199 · 2012 6 citations

+ 6 more citations in this opinion.

Navarre v. South Washington County Schools · 2002 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Minnesota Court of Appeals

Forslund v. State · 2019 5 citations

+ 5 more citations in this opinion.

Emerson v. School Board of Independent School District 199 · 2010 8 citations

+ 8 more citations in this opinion.

Christopher v. Windom Area School Board · 2010 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Montplaisir v. Independent School District No. 23 · 2010 8 citations

+ 8 more citations in this opinion.

Hinckley v. School Board of Independent School District No. 2167 · 2004 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Independent School District No. 404 v. Castor · 2003 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Savre v. Independent School District No. 283 · 2002 10 citations

+ 10 more citations in this opinion.

Thomas v. Independent School District No. 2142 · 2002 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Moe v. Independent School District No. 696, Ely · 2001 5 citations

+ 5 more citations in this opinion.

Emanuel v. Independent School District No. 273 · 2000 5 citations

+ 5 more citations in this opinion.

Shaner v. Independent School District No. 2884 · 2000 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Washington v. Independent School District No. 625 · 1999 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

U.S. District Court, D. Minnesota

Thomas v. Marshall Public Schools · 2023 2 citations

09-cv-4170 (KES), 2011 WL 1828039, at *31 (D.S.D. May 12, 2011)). Plaintiff contends the work product doctrine is inapplicable because Heggem did not conduct the investigation “in anticipation of litigation.” Defendants disagree. They note that because Plaintiff was covered by the Teacher Tenure Act (Minn. Stat. § 122A.40), she was entitled to grieve any disciplinary action imposed against her through binding arbitration (ECF No. 64 at 12). Accordingly, in their view, “every investigation into the alleged misconduct of a continuing contract/tenured employee carries with it the likelihood than the investigation could become the basis for discipline”, which may be “challenged through grievance arbitration.” (Id. at 12-13.) But Defendants’ argument proves too much. Taken to its logical extreme, Defendants effectively argue that, so long as some legal process exists for an employee to challenge workplace discipline,

09-cv-4170 (KES), 2011 WL 1828039, at *31 (D.S.D. May 12, 2011)). Plaintiff contends the work product doctrine is inapplicable because Heggem did not conduct the investigation “in anticipation of litigation.” Defendants disagree. They note that because Plaintiff was covered by the Teacher Tenure Act (Minn. Stat. § 122A.40), she was entitled to grieve any disciplinary action imposed against her through binding arbitration (ECF No. 64 at 12). Accordingly, in their view, “every investigation into the alleged misconduct of a continuing contract/tenured employee carries with it the likelihood than the investigation could become the basis for discipline”, which may be “challenged through grievance arbitration.” (Id. at 12-13.) But Defendants’ argument proves too much. Taken to its logical extreme, Defendants effectively argue that, so long as some legal process exists for an employee to challenge workplace discipline,

Willman v. Farmington Area Public School District · 2023 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

McGuire v. Independent School District No. 833 · 2015 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.