Case ID: nw2d_428/html/0491-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "WOZNIAK, Chief Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE of Minnesota, by Stephen COOPER, Commissioner, Department of Human Rights, Respondent, v. MOWER COUNTY SOCIAL SERVICES, Relator.
    No. C5-88-1601.
    Court of Appeals of Minnesota.
    Sept. 6, 1988.
    Hubert H. Humphrey, III, Atty. Gen., Carl Warren, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., St. Paul, for respondent.
    Scott Lepak, Steffan & Munstenteiger, Anoka, for relator.
    Considered at Special Term and decided by WOZNIAK, C.J., and PARKER and SCHUMACHER, JJ., without oral argument.
   SPECIAL TERM OPINION

WOZNIAK, Chief Judge.

FACTS

Relator Mower County seeks certiorari review of an administrative law judge’s decision awarding damages for discrimination against a former employee. Respondent state filed a notice of review, challenging the denial of prejudgment interest. Relator’s motion for a stay of the decision pending appeal was not opposed.

DECISION

Although the filing of a certiorari appeal does not automatically stay the decision to be reviewed, the agency may grant a stay, “or the court of appeals may order a stay upon such terms as it deems proper.” Minn.Stat. § 14.65 (1986). The respondent did not oppose the motion for a stay, so the remaining issue is whether security should be required.

Since the decision appealed from in this case is essentially a money judgment, the usual condition of a stay would be a super-sedeas bond to guarantee payment of the judgment, if affirmed on appeal. Minn.R. Civ.App.P. 108.01, subds. 1, 3. However, when an appeal is taken by a governmental subdivision, no bond or other security is required to obtain a stay. Minn.R.Civ.P. 62.04. Accordingly, the decision and award of damages are stayed pending resolution of this appeal, without bond.

MOTION FOR STAY GRANTED.