The Common Interest Doctrine (2021) There’s a particular kind of judicial error that isn’t just “wrong.” It’s the kind that changes the rules midstream—the kind that converts discovery into a guessing game, and turns the words “privilege” and “confidential” into a... The Privilege Log Problem: 2 Sentences vs. 111 Pages What a privilege log is supposed to prevent “Privilege” is not supposed to be a trapdoor in civil discovery. But that is exactly what the privilege log problem creates: one side can withhold documents, invoke... Oversight Without Oversight When a Chief Judge Won’t Engage the Record In Minnesota, a “chief judge” is not a ceremonial title. By statute, the chief judge of a judicial district exercises general administrative authority over the courts in that district and has... If a judge signed a protective order to guard your most sensitive life details from disclosure to the general public in a civil lawsuit, what would you expect? Would you expect the judge to enforce it? Would you expect a stern warning to anyone responsible for a... Eroding Trust, One Dismissal at a Time A watchdog that won’t look is not a watchdog. The Minnesota Board on Judicial Standards (BJS) describes its mission in public-trust terms: to “promote and preserve public confidence in the independence, integrity, and... State v. Jones The Appellant’s Brief Draws a Line Minnesota Shouldn’t Cross On January 21, 2026, I wrote about the Minnesota Supreme Court’s decision to grant review in State v. Jones (A24-1451)—and why the case matters far beyond one defendant and one trial judge.... Distorting the Law – Spousal Privilege In her article titled Piercing Spousal Privilege, Marie described what it felt like to have a district court try to force open our marital privacy—what Minnesota law calls spousal privilege. The issue wasn’t abstract. The... Can a Minnesota district court judge pierce spousal privilege by ordering production of a private communication between a husband and wife? In our case, the answer – at least at the district court level – was yes. Judge Kevin Miller tried to force it. And I was... When Truth Is Moot Should a person’s conflicting testimony under oath be scrutinized by a District Court? That question shouldn’t be controversial. And yet, in our case, the judge chose to look away. This isn’t theoretical. We have watched a pattern play out in... Ellipses, Omitted Text, and the Appearance of Bias What a new appellate decision gets right—and what it accidentally exposes about how trust in the judicial system erodes. On February 2, 2026, the Minnesota Court of Appeals decided Zinda v. Heintzeman, a case where... Did They Think We Wouldn’t Notice? There’s a moment that changes you as a litigant. Not when the complaint is filed. Not when the first aggressive email lands in your inbox. Not even when you sit through a hearing and realize the tone of the room has already been... The Quest for Truth Should Alarm No One In the Defendants’ opposition to our motion to recuse Judge Kevin Miller, they didn’t just argue law. They took aim at the act of looking—at what any ordinary person would think is the most basic right a litigant has: to read... When the “Author” Disappears Metadata, Transparency, and Public Trust in Otter Tail County One of the quiet ways courts earn (or lose) public trust is through something most people never think about: basic transparency that lets the public verify who did what. Not... Petition for Review (PFR) Granted in State v. Jones (Independent Judicial Investigation) Will Minnesota Recognize an Exception to the “Bright-Line” Rule? On January 21, 2026, the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review of Issue 1 (independent investigation) in State... As owners of a small business, Craig and I have worked hard for most of our lives. We don’t waste time. And we don’t quit easily. Once in a great while, Craig takes a break to play a galactic starship game. A year or two ago, he told me about a match he was clearly... There are facts that are difficult to explain to people who haven’t lived them. One of those facts is this: when you grow up with abuse—and spend decades building a life that is finally safe—your abuser doesn’t become a “memory.” He becomes a condition. A shadow... The Misconceptions I Brought Into Court Before, during, and after our lawsuit, I carried a long list of assumptions about how the judicial system worked—assumptions I didn’t even realize were assumptions until they started collapsing one by one. I believed the... When the rule is “bright-line,” outcomes shouldn’t depend on who shows up at the last minute. The uncomfortable question Appellate courts insist that justice is not personalized—that it does not turn on who is assigned, who is presiding, or who happens to be... What happens when judicial triage becomes a substitute for truth-finding? During our lawsuit in Otter Tail County District Court, one question kept returning—quietly at first, then relentlessly: were we being denied justice because the judge was simply too busy? I... Why Judicial Humility Is Not Weakness—but a Duty There is a quiet truth rarely acknowledged within the judicial system: justice sometimes requires judges to admit they were wrong. Not on appeal. Not years later after reputations are ruined or families fractured.... How Leonida and Stevenson show where Minnesota’s “bright-line” rules bend—and where missing context does the real work. For years, I’ve used a simple phrase to teach my family something that applies far beyond the courtroom: The truth is in the gaps. Because the... When Craig and I filed our civil lawsuit in November 2020, we brought claims against three defendants. Craig asserted claims for defamation and conspiracy. I brought a claim for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED). We did not arrive at litigation... Before my deposition, I had no real understanding of what actually happens in one. I imagined something far more dramatic—bright lights, and one or two police officers standing behind me, ready to arrest me if I said something “wrong.” I walked in with the kind of... During the course of our lawsuit, I openly questioned how we could lose a case where the facts and the law consistently appeared to support us, and where members of the opposing side had failed to disclose relevant evidence, deleted evidence surrounding every... In Brief: Minnesota’s Board on Judicial Standards (BJS) publicly promises accountability, impartiality, and enforcement of the Code of Judicial Conduct. But its responses to documented misconduct complaints tell a different story: repeated dismissals, no... Minnesota’s courts have long recognized one of the clearest principles in due-process jurisprudence: a judge may not independently investigate facts outside the record. When they do, it is structural error—automatically reversible, with no need to prove prejudice.... Minnesota’s Supreme Court has long held that when a judge independently investigates or considers facts outside the record, the resulting violation is structural error requiring automatic reversal. That rule, established in State v. Dorsey and reaffirmed repeatedly... Every Minnesotan has the right to an impartial judge — one who decides cases only on the evidence presented, not on facts gathered privately or through outside inquiry. That principle may sound self-evident, but recent cases show how easily it can be forgotten or... On October 18, 2025, I filed a formal complaint with the Minnesota Board on Judicial Standards (BJS) calling for discipline of Judge Kevin M. Miller (Otter Tail County District Court) and Judges Jennifer L. Frisch, Randall J. Slieter, and Tracy M. Smith (Minnesota... Even under the law before the Minnesota Supreme Court’s September 3, 2025 decision in State v. Duol (A24-1754), the Court of Appeals’ opinion in Stevenson v. Stevenson (A25-0186) misframed and minimized a due-process problem. It treated a judge’s independent... Minnesota law is clear: judges decide cases on the record the parties create, not on facts they find themselves or “selected facts” they prefer. For years, the Minnesota Court of Appeals has treated a judge’s independent investigation or reliance on extra-record... One of the most basic rules of judicial conduct is this: judges cannot act as their own investigators. They cannot perform Google searches, consult outside sources, or dig up facts that were never introduced into evidence. When they do, they stop being neutral... One of the most basic rules of judging is simple: a judge cannot go outside the record to investigate facts. The Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct makes this clear, and appellate courts have repeated it time and time again: decisions must be based on the evidence... During oral argument in our appeal, Judge Tracy Smith asked: “And how do those facts get into the record if they're relevant to the decision on, you know, a motion that someone has brought?” On the surface, it might sound like an innocent procedural question. But... Following the loss of our recent appeal, I wanted to know just how often the Minnesota Court of Appeals confronts situations where a trial judge conducts their own (independent) investigation into disputed facts—a practice that runs directly against the core... In a decision handed down today, July 28, 2025, the Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed a ruling that reeks of institutional protectionism and selective blindness. The court refused to disqualify Judge Kevin Miller—despite undisputed evidence that his law clerk,... In a troubling opinion issued June 30, 2025, the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed a Mille Lacs County judge for dismissing criminal charges based on improper legal standards, speculation, and what the appellate court called “a collateral attack” on a harassment... There is a famous quip, often attributed to Groucho Marx, that captures a deep and dangerous absurdity: “Who are you going to believe—me, or your lying eyes?” That’s exactly what it feels like to encounter a justice system that insists—again and again—that nothing... Child abuse isn’t easy to talk about. While there are various times set aside each year to bring awareness to the topic, many still shy away from it. In fact, someone once told me not to expect meaningful conversations about it in our shared social circles. They... Today, June 4, 2025, marks five years since the start of the events that triggered our civil lawsuit in Otter Tail County. I was at work, handling tasks for our family business, when my phone rang. It was my mother. Her voice was tense: “Are you sitting down?... On June 2, 2025, the Minnesota Court of Appeals issued a powerful reversal in Wakasugi v. 3M, holding that genuine issues of material fact precluded summary judgment on claims of pregnancy discrimination and retaliatory discharge. However, just fourteen months... In a troubling decision issued on May 27, 2025, the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed a probation revocation in State v. Jaeger (A24-1375) but declined to take the one step that would restore public confidence in the case: reassigning it to a different judge on... On January 24, 2022, Judge Kevin Miller signed an Amended Protective Order in Stevenson v. Stevenson, Case No. 56-CV-20-2928. That order, like the original from July 22, 2021, imposed strict confidentiality requirements on litigants—mandating that any court filings... Christopher Cadem’s recent column in The Fergus Falls Daily Journal offers a spirited defense of Minnesota’s judiciary, portraying it as an impartial arbiter that wisely balances public safety and constitutional rights. He goes so far as to suggest that critiques... Anyone who has to prepare for a deposition should take the time to read Jim Garrity's excellent deposition preparation book, Five-Minute Guide to Creating Invincible Deponents. Going into a deposition for the first time can be intimidating, and Garrity outlines the... Attending a deposition as a party in a lawsuit was a new experience for me in early 2022. Craig and I were scheduled for a two-day block of depositions on a Thursday and Friday in a conference room at the Otter Tail County Courthouse. Those two days happened to be... In 2015, Zachary and Connor Kvalvog died in a rollover crash en route to a basketball tournament. Their father, Raymond Kvalvog, has since fought for accountability against Park Christian School (PCS), coach Josh Lee, and others, asserting negligence, cover-up, and...Distorting the Law – The Common Interest Doctrine (2021)
The Privilege Log Problem: 2 Sentences vs. 111 Pages
Oversight Without Oversight
A Protective Order That Protected Nothing
Eroding Trust, One Dismissal at a Time
State v. Jones: The Appellant’s Brief Draws a Line Minnesota Shouldn’t Cross
Distorting the Law – Spousal Privilege
Piercing Spousal Privilege
When Truth Is Moot
Ellipses, Omitted Text, and the Appearance of Bias
Did They Think We Wouldn’t Notice?
The Quest for Truth Should Alarm No One
When the “Author” Disappears
Petition for Review (PFR) Granted in State v. Jones (Independent Judicial Investigation)
The Power of the Pen
Revenge: What the Judge Refused to Acknowledge, Even in Passing
The Misconceptions I Brought Into Court
Panel Shopping in Plain Sight?
“I Can Limit Discovery”
When Judges Admit They Were Wrong
The Truth is in the Gaps
A Judicial Blind Eye
What My First Deposition Taught Me
Hometowned
When the Message Doesn’t Match the Reality
When the Rule Matters—and When It Doesn’t
When Structural Error Applies for Some
A Constitutional Right to an Impartial Judge
When the Judges Investigate Themselves
Two Opinions, One Problem
When Judges Go Off-Record
When Judges Investigate on Their Own
When Judicial Rules Apply to Some – But Not Others
When the Law Says No, But a Judge Says How Else?
Independent Investigations – By The Numbers
When Connections Don’t Count
When Judges Cross the Line—And Still Keep the Case
Who Are You Going to Believe—Me, or Your Lying Eyes?
Child Abuse – One in Four: We Need to Talk About It
Five Years Later – A Look Back
Two Faces of Summary Judgment
When Familiarity Breeds Bias
Judge Miller’s Selective Enforcement
The Myth of a Fair System
Truthfulness in Depositions
Craig’s Deposition – My Answers!
Silencing by Sanction
The Common Interest Doctrine (2021) There’s a particular kind of judicial error that isn’t just “wrong.” It’s the kind that changes the rules midstream—the kind that converts discovery into a guessing game, and turns the words “privilege” and “confidential” into a... The Privilege Log Problem: 2 Sentences vs. 111 Pages What a privilege log is supposed to prevent “Privilege” is not supposed to be a trapdoor in civil discovery. But that is exactly what the privilege log problem creates: one side can withhold documents, invoke... Oversight Without Oversight When a Chief Judge Won’t Engage the Record In Minnesota, a “chief judge” is not a ceremonial title. By statute, the chief judge of a judicial district exercises general administrative authority over the courts in that district and has... Eroding Trust, One Dismissal at a Time A watchdog that won’t look is not a watchdog. The Minnesota Board on Judicial Standards (BJS) describes its mission in public-trust terms: to “promote and preserve public confidence in the independence, integrity, and... State v. Jones The Appellant’s Brief Draws a Line Minnesota Shouldn’t Cross On January 21, 2026, I wrote about the Minnesota Supreme Court’s decision to grant review in State v. Jones (A24-1451)—and why the case matters far beyond one defendant and one trial judge.... Distorting the Law – Spousal Privilege In her article titled Piercing Spousal Privilege, Marie described what it felt like to have a district court try to force open our marital privacy—what Minnesota law calls spousal privilege. The issue wasn’t abstract. The... Ellipses, Omitted Text, and the Appearance of Bias What a new appellate decision gets right—and what it accidentally exposes about how trust in the judicial system erodes. On February 2, 2026, the Minnesota Court of Appeals decided Zinda v. Heintzeman, a case where... Did They Think We Wouldn’t Notice? There’s a moment that changes you as a litigant. Not when the complaint is filed. Not when the first aggressive email lands in your inbox. Not even when you sit through a hearing and realize the tone of the room has already been... The Quest for Truth Should Alarm No One In the Defendants’ opposition to our motion to recuse Judge Kevin Miller, they didn’t just argue law. They took aim at the act of looking—at what any ordinary person would think is the most basic right a litigant has: to read... When the “Author” Disappears Metadata, Transparency, and Public Trust in Otter Tail County One of the quiet ways courts earn (or lose) public trust is through something most people never think about: basic transparency that lets the public verify who did what. Not... Petition for Review (PFR) Granted in State v. Jones (Independent Judicial Investigation) Will Minnesota Recognize an Exception to the “Bright-Line” Rule? On January 21, 2026, the Minnesota Supreme Court granted review of Issue 1 (independent investigation) in State... The Misconceptions I Brought Into Court Before, during, and after our lawsuit, I carried a long list of assumptions about how the judicial system worked—assumptions I didn’t even realize were assumptions until they started collapsing one by one. I believed the... When the rule is “bright-line,” outcomes shouldn’t depend on who shows up at the last minute. The uncomfortable question Appellate courts insist that justice is not personalized—that it does not turn on who is assigned, who is presiding, or who happens to be... Why Judicial Humility Is Not Weakness—but a Duty There is a quiet truth rarely acknowledged within the judicial system: justice sometimes requires judges to admit they were wrong. Not on appeal. Not years later after reputations are ruined or families fractured.... How Leonida and Stevenson show where Minnesota’s “bright-line” rules bend—and where missing context does the real work. For years, I’ve used a simple phrase to teach my family something that applies far beyond the courtroom: The truth is in the gaps. Because the... During the course of our lawsuit, I openly questioned how we could lose a case where the facts and the law consistently appeared to support us, and where members of the opposing side had failed to disclose relevant evidence, deleted evidence surrounding every... In Brief: Minnesota’s Board on Judicial Standards (BJS) publicly promises accountability, impartiality, and enforcement of the Code of Judicial Conduct. But its responses to documented misconduct complaints tell a different story: repeated dismissals, no... Minnesota’s courts have long recognized one of the clearest principles in due-process jurisprudence: a judge may not independently investigate facts outside the record. When they do, it is structural error—automatically reversible, with no need to prove prejudice.... Minnesota’s Supreme Court has long held that when a judge independently investigates or considers facts outside the record, the resulting violation is structural error requiring automatic reversal. That rule, established in State v. Dorsey and reaffirmed repeatedly... Every Minnesotan has the right to an impartial judge — one who decides cases only on the evidence presented, not on facts gathered privately or through outside inquiry. That principle may sound self-evident, but recent cases show how easily it can be forgotten or... On October 18, 2025, I filed a formal complaint with the Minnesota Board on Judicial Standards (BJS) calling for discipline of Judge Kevin M. Miller (Otter Tail County District Court) and Judges Jennifer L. Frisch, Randall J. Slieter, and Tracy M. Smith (Minnesota... Even under the law before the Minnesota Supreme Court’s September 3, 2025 decision in State v. Duol (A24-1754), the Court of Appeals’ opinion in Stevenson v. Stevenson (A25-0186) misframed and minimized a due-process problem. It treated a judge’s independent... Minnesota law is clear: judges decide cases on the record the parties create, not on facts they find themselves or “selected facts” they prefer. For years, the Minnesota Court of Appeals has treated a judge’s independent investigation or reliance on extra-record... One of the most basic rules of judicial conduct is this: judges cannot act as their own investigators. They cannot perform Google searches, consult outside sources, or dig up facts that were never introduced into evidence. When they do, they stop being neutral... One of the most basic rules of judging is simple: a judge cannot go outside the record to investigate facts. The Minnesota Code of Judicial Conduct makes this clear, and appellate courts have repeated it time and time again: decisions must be based on the evidence... During oral argument in our appeal, Judge Tracy Smith asked: “And how do those facts get into the record if they're relevant to the decision on, you know, a motion that someone has brought?” On the surface, it might sound like an innocent procedural question. But... Following the loss of our recent appeal, I wanted to know just how often the Minnesota Court of Appeals confronts situations where a trial judge conducts their own (independent) investigation into disputed facts—a practice that runs directly against the core... In a decision handed down today, July 28, 2025, the Minnesota Court of Appeals affirmed a ruling that reeks of institutional protectionism and selective blindness. The court refused to disqualify Judge Kevin Miller—despite undisputed evidence that his law clerk,... In a troubling opinion issued June 30, 2025, the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed a Mille Lacs County judge for dismissing criminal charges based on improper legal standards, speculation, and what the appellate court called “a collateral attack” on a harassment... There is a famous quip, often attributed to Groucho Marx, that captures a deep and dangerous absurdity: “Who are you going to believe—me, or your lying eyes?” That’s exactly what it feels like to encounter a justice system that insists—again and again—that nothing... On June 2, 2025, the Minnesota Court of Appeals issued a powerful reversal in Wakasugi v. 3M, holding that genuine issues of material fact precluded summary judgment on claims of pregnancy discrimination and retaliatory discharge. However, just fourteen months... In a troubling decision issued on May 27, 2025, the Minnesota Court of Appeals reversed a probation revocation in State v. Jaeger (A24-1375) but declined to take the one step that would restore public confidence in the case: reassigning it to a different judge on... On January 24, 2022, Judge Kevin Miller signed an Amended Protective Order in Stevenson v. Stevenson, Case No. 56-CV-20-2928. That order, like the original from July 22, 2021, imposed strict confidentiality requirements on litigants—mandating that any court filings... Christopher Cadem’s recent column in The Fergus Falls Daily Journal offers a spirited defense of Minnesota’s judiciary, portraying it as an impartial arbiter that wisely balances public safety and constitutional rights. He goes so far as to suggest that critiques... In 2015, Zachary and Connor Kvalvog died in a rollover crash en route to a basketball tournament. Their father, Raymond Kvalvog, has since fought for accountability against Park Christian School (PCS), coach Josh Lee, and others, asserting negligence, cover-up, and...Distorting the Law – The Common Interest Doctrine (2021)
The Privilege Log Problem: 2 Sentences vs. 111 Pages
Oversight Without Oversight
Eroding Trust, One Dismissal at a Time
State v. Jones: The Appellant’s Brief Draws a Line Minnesota Shouldn’t Cross
Distorting the Law – Spousal Privilege
Ellipses, Omitted Text, and the Appearance of Bias
Did They Think We Wouldn’t Notice?
The Quest for Truth Should Alarm No One
When the “Author” Disappears
Petition for Review (PFR) Granted in State v. Jones (Independent Judicial Investigation)
The Misconceptions I Brought Into Court
Panel Shopping in Plain Sight?
When Judges Admit They Were Wrong
The Truth is in the Gaps
Hometowned
When the Message Doesn’t Match the Reality
When the Rule Matters—and When It Doesn’t
When Structural Error Applies for Some
A Constitutional Right to an Impartial Judge
When the Judges Investigate Themselves
Two Opinions, One Problem
When Judges Go Off-Record
When Judges Investigate on Their Own
When Judicial Rules Apply to Some – But Not Others
When the Law Says No, But a Judge Says How Else?
Independent Investigations – By The Numbers
When Connections Don’t Count
When Judges Cross the Line—And Still Keep the Case
Who Are You Going to Believe—Me, or Your Lying Eyes?
Two Faces of Summary Judgment
When Familiarity Breeds Bias
Judge Miller’s Selective Enforcement
The Myth of a Fair System
Silencing by Sanction
If a judge signed a protective order to guard your most sensitive life details from disclosure to the general public in a civil lawsuit, what would you expect? Would you expect the judge to enforce it? Would you expect a stern warning to anyone responsible for a... Can a Minnesota district court judge pierce spousal privilege by ordering production of a private communication between a husband and wife? In our case, the answer – at least at the district court level – was yes. Judge Kevin Miller tried to force it. And I was... When Truth Is Moot Should a person’s conflicting testimony under oath be scrutinized by a District Court? That question shouldn’t be controversial. And yet, in our case, the judge chose to look away. This isn’t theoretical. We have watched a pattern play out in... As owners of a small business, Craig and I have worked hard for most of our lives. We don’t waste time. And we don’t quit easily. Once in a great while, Craig takes a break to play a galactic starship game. A year or two ago, he told me about a match he was clearly... There are facts that are difficult to explain to people who haven’t lived them. One of those facts is this: when you grow up with abuse—and spend decades building a life that is finally safe—your abuser doesn’t become a “memory.” He becomes a condition. A shadow... What happens when judicial triage becomes a substitute for truth-finding? During our lawsuit in Otter Tail County District Court, one question kept returning—quietly at first, then relentlessly: were we being denied justice because the judge was simply too busy? I... When Craig and I filed our civil lawsuit in November 2020, we brought claims against three defendants. Craig asserted claims for defamation and conspiracy. I brought a claim for Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress (IIED). We did not arrive at litigation... Child abuse isn’t easy to talk about. While there are various times set aside each year to bring awareness to the topic, many still shy away from it. In fact, someone once told me not to expect meaningful conversations about it in our shared social circles. They... Today, June 4, 2025, marks five years since the start of the events that triggered our civil lawsuit in Otter Tail County. I was at work, handling tasks for our family business, when my phone rang. It was my mother. Her voice was tense: “Are you sitting down?... Anyone who has to prepare for a deposition should take the time to read Jim Garrity's excellent deposition preparation book, Five-Minute Guide to Creating Invincible Deponents. Going into a deposition for the first time can be intimidating, and Garrity outlines the... Attending a deposition as a party in a lawsuit was a new experience for me in early 2022. Craig and I were scheduled for a two-day block of depositions on a Thursday and Friday in a conference room at the Otter Tail County Courthouse. Those two days happened to be...A Protective Order That Protected Nothing
Piercing Spousal Privilege
When Truth Is Moot
The Power of the Pen
Revenge: What the Judge Refused to Acknowledge, Even in Passing
“I Can Limit Discovery”
A Judicial Blind Eye
Child Abuse – One in Four: We Need to Talk About It
Five Years Later – A Look Back
Truthfulness in Depositions
Craig’s Deposition – My Answers!
Before my deposition, I had no real understanding of what actually happens in one. I imagined something far more dramatic—bright lights, and one or two police officers standing behind me, ready to arrest me if I said something “wrong.” I walked in with the kind of...What My First Deposition Taught Me