Henry L. Wilson, Respondent, vs. Scanlan International, Inc., and State Fund Mutual Ins. Co., Relators, and HealthPartners, Fairview Health Services, Allina Hospitals & Clinic/United Hospital, St. Paul Radiology, Neurological Associates, and University of Minnesota Physicians, Intervenors.

Annotate this Case
Henry L. Wilson, Respondent, vs. Scanlan International, Inc., and State Fund Mutual Ins. Co., Relators, and HealthPartners, Fairview Health Services, Allina Hospitals & Clinic/United Hospital, St. Paul Radiology, Neurological Associates, and University of Minnesota Physicians, Intervenors. A06-23, Supreme Court Order, March 30, 2006.

STATE OF MINNESOTA

IN SUPREME COURT

A06-23

 

 

Henry L. Wilson,

 

                                    Respondent,

 

vs.

 

Scanlan International, Inc., and

State Fund Mutual Ins. Co.,

 

                                    Relators,

 

and

 

HealthPartners, Fairview Health Services,

Allina Hospitals & Clinic/United Hospital,

St. Paul Radiology, Neurological Associates,

and University of Minnesota Physicians,

 

                                                Intervenors.

 

            Considered and decided by the court en banc.

 

O R D E R

 

            Based upon all the files, records, and proceedings herein,

            IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the decision of the Workers' Compensation Court of Appeals filed December 9, 2005, be, and the same is, affirmed without opinion.  See Hoff v. Kempton, 317 N.W.2d 361, 366 (Minn. 1982) (summary 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.

            Dated:  March 28, 2006

                                                                                    BY THE COURT:

 

 

 

    /s/                                                        

 

G. Barry Anderson

Associate Justice

 

GILDEA, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.