Stephen C Fiebiger Law Office, Chartered -LOGO
,
This is a placeholder for the Yext Knolwedge Tags. This message will not appear on the live site, but only within the editor. The Yext Knowledge Tags are successfully installed and will be added to the website.
This is a placeholder for the Yext Knolwedge Tags. This message will not appear on the live site, but only within the editor. The Yext Knowledge Tags are successfully installed and will be added to the website.
Employment Lawyers

Blog Layout

Fiebiger Wins Contested Guardianship Trial

fiebigerste51715443 • Mar 08, 2020

On January 28, 2020 the Hennepin County District Court, Probate Court Division, issued an Order denying a petition for guardianship in a contested case in which Stephen Fiebiger represented the proposed Ward as court-appointed attorney. The case was tried in November, 2019, after the Court granted Fiebiger’s motion for a new trial following a previous trial in March and Order appointing a temporary limited guardian of April 23, 2019. The case is In re Guardianship of Roscious Woods, Court File No. 27-GC-PR-19-92.

16 Dec, 2023
Minnesota has banned non-compete agreements effective July 1, 2023. The new law provides that “Any covenant not to compete contained in a contract or agreement is void and unenforceable.” The law affects employment contracts that included restrictive covenants for employee agreements. A covenant not to compete does not include a nondisclosure agreement, or agreement designed to protect trade secrets or confidential information. A covenant not to compete also does not include a nonsolicitation agreement, or agreement restricting the ability to use client or contact lists, or solicit customers of the employer. Covenants not to compete in connection with the sale or dissolution of a business are not affected. The new law is set out in Minnesota Statute Section 181.988. The ban on non-compete covenants in employee agreements does not apply to agreements entered before July 1, 2023.
By Hibu Websites 23 May, 2022
Employees facing hostile working conditions such as sexual harassment, discrimination, or other illegal conduct can take steps to protect themselves and their rights. Here are five tips. 1. Document incidents and events. Keep a written journal. When events occur that are hostile, offensive or discriminatory, make a note to record the date, time and circumstances. Keep a record of offensive comments and situations and who you have talked to about it. You can record it in a spiral notebook, a calendar, or notes. Consider maintaining it in written form so you own it. An electronic method is fine, so long as you have ownership of the device. 2. Make sure your documentation remains accessible if the employment ends. In other words, do not leave it at the office or on a work computer or device. 3. Obtain a copy of the company’s human resources policies and read the section on reporting complaints. Employees are required to follow reasonable policies for reporting complaints of harassment and discrimination for investigation and resolution. Employees are required to report discriminatory harassment by co-workers and an be important harassment by supervisors. If a complaint is made, keep a copy. 4. Request a copy of your personnel record. In Minnesota, employees have the right to review their personnel record every six months while employed. If separated from employment, employees have the right to request a copy from the employer at no charge. The request must be in writing. Employers must comply with a written request no later than seven working days after receipt of the request if the personnel record is located in this state, or no later than 14 working days after receipt of the request if the personnel record is located outside this state. 5. Consider recording conversations. Generally, conversations can be recorded so long as one party to the conversation consents. While not practical for all situations, recordings can dispel later disputes about what was said.
By 7016469807 23 Apr, 2022
Stephen Fiebiger was re-appointed to the Merit System Council by Governor Tim Walz for a three-year term. Fiebiger’s appointment is from March 30, 2022 to January 6, 2025. The Minnesota Merit System announces civil service examinations for employment in the social services and human services agencies in 42 of Minnesota’s 87 counties. The Merit System Council hears personnel appeals, sets policy for administration of examinations, and reviews classification and compensation plans and proposed rule changes according to the news release from Governor Walz and Lieutenant Governor Flanagan.
By Hibu Websites 08 Oct, 2021
The Minnesota supreme court recently reversed a summary judgment in a wrongful death negligence case involving a woman who died after falling down a flight of stairs claimed to have been negligently maintained. Examining proximate cause and circumstantial evidence under the summary judgment standard, the court found genuine issues of material fact existed so that a jury could infer the poor and degraded conditions of the stairs was a substantial factor in causing the fall. The court rejected other theories as being dispositive of the case, including the absence of an eye witness. The case is Staub v. Myrtle Lake Resort, LLC, et al., Case No. A20-0267.
By Steve Fiebiger 08 Aug, 2021
The Minnesota Court of Appeals issued a precedential decision on July 26, 2021 in an age discrimination case under the Minnesota Human Rights Act (MHRA) containing helpful language for proving the third and fourth elements of the prima facie case. The four-part prima facie case must be established for most discrimination claims under the McDonnel Douglas test used by the courts. The case is Henry v. Independent School District #625, a/k/a St. Paul Public Schools, Case No. A21-0004. For the third element requiring evidence the employee suffered an adverse employment action, the Court observed that "the concept of an adverse employment action is broader than proof of discharge or constructive discharge, and may also be proved if an employee presents evidence that, when considered cumulatively, could lead a reasonable juror to conclude the employee suffered a tangible change in working conditions that produces a material employment discharge." Op. at 15. The Court focused on the use of three performance evaluations in less than a year; exaggeration of trivial performance issues to support discipline; placement of the employee on an unachievable PIP with the intent that the employee would fail or resign; issuance of a letter threatening termination if she didn't accomplish the goals of the unachievable PIP; more harsh reprimands than for other employees; denied opportunity to attend a training session; and comments by the lead manager creating an environment where employees were reluctant to report discriminatory conduct. Id. at 15-16. The cumulative effect of these actions caused the employee to suffer an adverse employment action. The Court also used a more flexible standard for the fourth element by ruling it could be satisfied upon a showing that circumstances exist that give rise to an inference of discrimination, in lieu of having to show the employee was replaced by a person outside of the protected class. Id. at 14. In age cases this required replacement by a younger person. Hence, evidence of pretext can be used to satisfy this element if the employee has not been replaced by a person outside the protected class. This may well gain review by the supreme court, but since the decision was designated as precedential by the Court of Appeals, it will be useful until the supreme court rules otherwise.
By fiebigerste51715443 18 Jul, 2020
Minnesotans can vote by mail without having to personally visit their local polling site for the upcoming primary election on August 11, 202 and general election on November 3, 2020. You can have a mail in ballot sent to you by visiting mnvotes.org and requet an absentee ballot be mailed to you..
By fiebigerste51715443 05 Jul, 2020
On February 26, 2020, the Minnesota supreme court ordered a new trial in Larson v. Gannett Company, Inc., a media defamation case handled by Mr. Fiebiger, reversing a previous decision by the Minnesota Court of Appeals. Larson claimed he was defamed by statements published by KARE 11 and The St. Cloud Times following his arrest for the murder of Cold Sping police officer Tom Decker in November, 2012 and a news conference and news release by law enforcement. The supreme court ruled that the fair reporting privilege applied to five statements published by the defendants, but that a new trial was required to determine whether the privilege had been defeated or abused. The district court had not instructed the jury on the factors to consider in determining whether the privilege had been abused. The supreme court adopted Larson's argument that the falsity instruction given at trial was insufficient and incomplete to determine whether the privilege had been defeated. This should be decided by a jury. The media defendants' petition for rehearing was denied by the suprme court on March 30, 2020. The supreme court's opinion is published at 940 N.W.2d 120 (Minn. 2020). A new trial date in Hennepin County District Court has not been set.
By fiebigerste51715443 15 Jun, 2020
In a landmark decision today, the United States Supreme Court ruled that gay and transgender employees are protected from discrimination in employment by their employers under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act. The Court held that an employer who fires an individual merely for being gay or transgender violates Title VII. The 6-3 decision is Bostock v. Clayton County (17-1618) with the majority opinion authored by Justice Gorsuch. Justices Alioto, Thomas, and Kavenaugh dissented.
By fiebigerste51715443 23 Apr, 2020
On April 15, 2020, Governor Walz signed into law HF 4556 suspending all civil court filing deadlines, statutes of limitations, and other time periods prescribed by law in the district and appellate courts. The limitations are suspended until 60 days after the end of the peacetime emergency from the COVID 19 pandemic.
By fiebigerste51715443 04 Oct, 2019
My law office moved down the street to 3000 West County Road 42, Suite 310, Burnsville, MN on October 1. We're at the corner of West County Road 42 and Southcross in the former Klein Bank Building with free parking. I look forward to serving clients from my new location.
More Posts
Share by: