When Lawyers Mislead Minnesota Courts Candor Is Not Optional In Minnesota, a lawyer’s duty of advocacy has a hard boundary: the lawyer may argue forcefully, interpret the record favorably, and press every good-faith legal position available to the client. But a... Concurrent Injustice: Minnesota’s “Volume Discount” for Predators Why Minnesota’s Sentencing Guidelines Fail Victims of Abuse For the first 50 years of my life as a Minnesota citizen, I never gave much thought to the justice system. I had never stepped inside a... The Number Went Down. The Pattern Did Not. What the Minnesota Board on Judicial Standards’ 2025 Annual Report adds to the story. Last year, I wrote about a troubling reality in Minnesota’s judicial-discipline system in Eroding Trust, One Dismissal at a Time: the... When Seeking Justice Means Surrendering Your Privacy How a Lawsuit Opened the Door to Surveillance, Fear, and the Loss of Safety at Home The moment I saw the unfamiliar car creeping slowly past our home, lingering just long enough to study the property, I knew... When the Courthouse Proves the Point Otter Tail County’s own Law Day event helps explain why so many litigants no longer trust the courts to recognize an appearance problem when they see one. On May 1, 2026, Otter Tail County will host a public Law Day Open House... An Open Letter to Minnesota’s Judicial System Justice is not preserved by authority alone. It is preserved when people can see that the law was applied fairly, the record was honored, and every litigant was truly heard. To the judges of Minnesota, to the appellate... Writing Back Against Revictimization When abuse victims are ignored, blamed, or mocked by the judicial system, telling the truth in their own words can become an act of survival. There is a special kind of pain that comes when you finally find the courage to speak... Distorting the Law: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Minnesota’s tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) is narrow by design. It is not an easy claim. The plaintiff must show extreme and outrageous conduct, intent or recklessness,... Distorting the Law: Antiquated Cases This post examines an Otter Tail District Court judge’s use of antiquated case law in his opinions and why it conflicted with newer, better-fitting Minnesota authority. Not every old case is bad law. Courts sometimes rely on... “We Told the Other Side to Pound Sand” Sean Stevenson’s Deleted Patrick Burns Review Sometimes a single document reveals far more than the party who created it ever intended. In our case, one of those documents was a public Google review that Sean Stevenson of... Distorting the Law: The Elements of a Crime Otter Tail County District Court Judge Kevin Miller suggested that whether a statement accuses someone of a crime “naturally turns” on the actual elements of that crime. Minnesota law says otherwise. In our case,... Distorting the Law: “Setting Aside the Fact” at Summary Judgment When a court has to set aside a material fact in order to grant summary judgment, the question is no longer whether the record was one-sided. The question is whether the court set aside the rules with... Distorting the Law: Motion to Amend Complaint When we moved to amend our complaint in Stevenson v. Stevenson, the governing rule was not supposed to be restrictive. Minnesota Rule 15 provides that leave to amend “shall be freely given when justice so requires.”... Distorting the Law: 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... 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... A Protective Order That Protected Nothing 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... 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... 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... Piercing Spousal Privilege 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... 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... Revenge: What the Judge Refused to Acknowledge, Even in Passing 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... 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... Panel Shopping in Plain Sight? 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... "I Can Limit Discovery" 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... When Judges Admit They Were Wrong 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... The Truth is in the Gaps 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... A Judicial Blind Eye 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... What My First Deposition Taught Me 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... Hometowned 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... When the Message Doesn’t Match the Reality 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... When the Rule Matters—and When It Doesn’t 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... When Structural Error Applies for Some 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... A Constitutional Right to an Impartial Judge 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... When the Judges Investigate Themselves 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.... Two Opinions, One Problem 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... When Judges Go Off-Record 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... When Judges Investigate on Their Own 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... When Judicial Rules Apply to Some - But Not Others 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... When the Law Says No, But a Judge Says How Else? 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... Independent Investigations - By The Numbers 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... When Connections Don’t Count 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... When Judges Cross the Line—And Still Keep the Case 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...When Lawyers Mislead Minnesota Courts
Concurrent Injustice: Minnesota’s “Volume Discount” for Predators
The Number Went Down. The Pattern Did Not.
When Seeking Justice Means Surrendering Your Privacy
When the Courthouse Proves the Point
An Open Letter to Minnesota’s Judicial System
Writing Back Against Revictimization
Distorting the Law – Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
Distorting the Law – Antiquated Cases
“We Told the Other Side to Pound Sand”
Distorting the Law – The Elements of a Crime
Distorting the Law – Setting Aside the Fact
Distorting the Law – Motion to Amend Complaint
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
When Lawyers Mislead Minnesota Courts Candor Is Not Optional In Minnesota, a lawyer’s duty of advocacy has a hard boundary: the lawyer may argue forcefully, interpret the record favorably, and press every good-faith legal position available to the client. But a... The Number Went Down. The Pattern Did Not. What the Minnesota Board on Judicial Standards’ 2025 Annual Report adds to the story. Last year, I wrote about a troubling reality in Minnesota’s judicial-discipline system in Eroding Trust, One Dismissal at a Time: the... When the Courthouse Proves the Point Otter Tail County’s own Law Day event helps explain why so many litigants no longer trust the courts to recognize an appearance problem when they see one. On May 1, 2026, Otter Tail County will host a public Law Day Open House... An Open Letter to Minnesota’s Judicial System Justice is not preserved by authority alone. It is preserved when people can see that the law was applied fairly, the record was honored, and every litigant was truly heard. To the judges of Minnesota, to the appellate... Distorting the Law: Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress Minnesota’s tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) is narrow by design. It is not an easy claim. The plaintiff must show extreme and outrageous conduct, intent or recklessness,... Distorting the Law: Antiquated Cases This post examines an Otter Tail District Court judge’s use of antiquated case law in his opinions and why it conflicted with newer, better-fitting Minnesota authority. Not every old case is bad law. Courts sometimes rely on... “We Told the Other Side to Pound Sand” Sean Stevenson’s Deleted Patrick Burns Review Sometimes a single document reveals far more than the party who created it ever intended. In our case, one of those documents was a public Google review that Sean Stevenson of... Distorting the Law: The Elements of a Crime Otter Tail County District Court Judge Kevin Miller suggested that whether a statement accuses someone of a crime “naturally turns” on the actual elements of that crime. Minnesota law says otherwise. In our case,... Distorting the Law: “Setting Aside the Fact” at Summary Judgment When a court has to set aside a material fact in order to grant summary judgment, the question is no longer whether the record was one-sided. The question is whether the court set aside the rules with... Distorting the Law: Motion to Amend Complaint When we moved to amend our complaint in Stevenson v. Stevenson, the governing rule was not supposed to be restrictive. Minnesota Rule 15 provides that leave to amend “shall be freely given when justice so requires.”... Distorting the Law: 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... 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... 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... Panel Shopping in Plain Sight? 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... When Judges Admit They Were Wrong 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... The Truth is in the Gaps 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... Hometowned 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... When the Message Doesn’t Match the Reality 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... When the Rule Matters—and When It Doesn’t 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... When Structural Error Applies for Some 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... A Constitutional Right to an Impartial Judge 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... When the Judges Investigate Themselves 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.... Two Opinions, One Problem 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... When Judges Go Off-Record 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... When Judges Investigate on Their Own 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... When Judicial Rules Apply to Some - But Not Others 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... When the Law Says No, But a Judge Says How Else? 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... Independent Investigations - By The Numbers 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... When Connections Don’t Count 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... When Judges Cross the Line—And Still Keep the Case 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... Who Are You Going to Believe—Me, or Your Lying Eyes? 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... Two Faces of Summary Judgment 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.... When Familiarity Breeds Bias 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... Judge Miller’s Selective Enforcement 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... The Myth of a Fair System 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... Silencing by Sanction 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...When Lawyers Mislead Minnesota Courts
The Number Went Down. The Pattern Did Not.
When the Courthouse Proves the Point
An Open Letter to Minnesota’s Judicial System
Distorting the Law – Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress
Distorting the Law – Antiquated Cases
“We Told the Other Side to Pound Sand”
Distorting the Law – The Elements of a Crime
Distorting the Law – Setting Aside the Fact
Distorting the Law – Motion to Amend Complaint
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
Concurrent Injustice: Minnesota’s “Volume Discount” for Predators Why Minnesota’s Sentencing Guidelines Fail Victims of Abuse For the first 50 years of my life as a Minnesota citizen, I never gave much thought to the justice system. I had never stepped inside a... When Seeking Justice Means Surrendering Your Privacy How a Lawsuit Opened the Door to Surveillance, Fear, and the Loss of Safety at Home The moment I saw the unfamiliar car creeping slowly past our home, lingering just long enough to study the property, I knew... Writing Back Against Revictimization When abuse victims are ignored, blamed, or mocked by the judicial system, telling the truth in their own words can become an act of survival. There is a special kind of pain that comes when you finally find the courage to speak... A Protective Order That Protected Nothing 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... Piercing Spousal Privilege 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... 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... Revenge: What the Judge Refused to Acknowledge, Even in Passing 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... "I Can Limit Discovery" 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... A Judicial Blind Eye 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... 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... Five Years Later – A Look Back 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... Truthfulness in Depositions 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... Craig’s Deposition – My Answers! 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...Concurrent Injustice: Minnesota’s “Volume Discount” for Predators
When Seeking Justice Means Surrendering Your Privacy
Writing Back Against Revictimization
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!
What My First Deposition Taught Me 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...What My First Deposition Taught Me