MINNESOTA CIVIL LITIGATION APPEALS LAWYER

Civil litigation cases frequently turn on questions of law rather than on disputed issues of fact. Is the plaintiff’s claim barred by the applicable statute of limitations? How is the contract between the parties to be interpreted? Is either party entitled to judgment as a matter of law in light of the undisputed facts?

District courts initially rule upon such legal questions. But a district’s court’s legal rulings are subject to appeal. It is important to understand that an appellate court reviews a district court’s legal rulings de novo (without “deferring” in any way to the lower court). For this reason, the appeal of a legal ruling is truly a new ball game.

Whether a party has won or lost at the district court level, the party must recognize that the outcome can change on appeal. It is critical, therefore, to ensure that the lawyer handling an appeal fully understands the appellate process and the special rules that govern it. Counsel must likewise have the experience to determine how best to frame and present pivotal legal issues to the appellate court.

CIVIL APPEAL VICTORIES

Brad Delapena has prosecuted and defended many complex appeals often involving large sums of money. Here are some examples:

State ex rel. Humphrey v. Philip Morris U.S.A., Inc.:   Contract.
Obtained reversal of district court order holding that the State’s 75-cents per-pack “Health Impact Fee” violated the State’s 1998 settlement with the major cigarette manufacturers. Brad’s appellate victory secured for the State of Minnesota a revenue stream valued at $180 million per year.

Council of Independent Tobacco Manufacturers of America v. State: First Amendment;   Equal Protection;   Bill of Attainder.
Sustained lower court ruling that the State’s 35-cent per-pack fee for non-settling cigarette manufacturers complied with the First Amendment and the Equal Protection Clause of the United States Constitution. Brad’s appellate victory secured for the State a revenue stream valued at $6 million per year.

Peoples State Bank Truman v. Triplett:   Limitation of Actions.
Sustained lower court ruling that bank’s claims were barred by the applicable statute of limitation.

Walker v. Zuehlke:   Equal Protection.
Obtained reversal of lower court ruling declaring that tax-base sharing within the State’s Taconite Tax Relief Area was unconstitutional.

Back To Top