Justice-Denied.org reporting

Investigations, analysis, and public records

Evidence-based reporting on judicial conduct, legal ethics, accountability, and the human cost of systems that fail to follow their own rules.

Latest reporting

By Marie StevensonPublished September 18, 2026About 17 min read

The Candor Files

When False Statements Become Litigation Strategy

How repeated misstatements can overwhelm page limits, distort the record, and become a litigation strategy.

During the course of our lawsuit, one thing became painfully obvious from the outset: truth was often treated as optional. Here at Justice-Denied.org, we have documented the pattern of perjury, deleted evidence…

Read article →

By Craig StevensonPublished September 16, 2026About 8 min read

Independent Investigations

A 2014 Recusal Record Changes the Morrison–Hansen Timeline

The 2014 Hansen recusal record places James Morrison in Judge Mark F. Hansen’s chambers when Hansen recused because his daughter was a partner in a law firm participating in the case.

Read article →

By Craig StevensonPublished September 14, 2026About 17 min read

The Fairness Files

Justice Above, Harm Below

A judicial system must be more than a facade of justice. Its promises must reach the people living with its decisions.

Minnesota promises equal access, fairness, impartiality, and accountability. What happens when the documented record collides with those promises?

Read article →

By Craig StevensonPublished September 10, 2026Updated October 27, 2026About 16 min read

The Fairness Files

The Discovery–Summary Judgment Loop

When narrowing a case creates the lack of evidence later used to keep it from a jury.

When courts narrow claims, restrict discovery, and later cite the resulting lack of evidence, procedure can become a closed loop that keeps facts from a jury.

Read article →

By Craig StevensonPublished September 9, 2026About 7 min read

Distorting the Law

The Price of Unverified Caselaw

A Minnesota appellant used AI-assisted research, failed to verify the cases he presented, and learned that “doing this part time” is not an exception to legal accuracy.

In Asiedu v. Eastlund, the Minnesota Court of Appeals upheld $2,341.25 in sanctions after a self-represented litigant used AI-assisted research and failed to verify misleading or nonexistent caselaw.

Read article →

By Marie StevensonPublished September 8, 2026Updated November 2, 2026About 10 min read

The Privacy Files

HRO Petitions: Protected by Law, Targeted for Exposure

Defendants sought to redesignate an HRO petition, an ex parte protection order, and decades of medical history as public—even though federal law, Minnesota’s internet-access rules, and the court’s own record-access rules recognize why those materials require protection.

HRO Petitions: Protected by Law, Targeted for Exposure The Federal Violence Against Women Act (VAWA) There is a reason Minnesota does not place Domestic Abuse Order for Protection (OFP) and Harassment Restraining Order…

Read article →

By Craig StevensonPublished September 4, 2026Updated October 27, 2026Main article: About 12 min read

The Fairness Files

How Often Does a Civil Case Reach an Otter Tail County Jury?

An eight-year review of 105 scheduled civil jury cases shows how rarely Otter Tail County jurors are asked to decide the facts.

An MCRO review found only four verdicts among 105 Otter Tail County civil cases with jury settings from May 2018 through August 2026.

Read article →

By Marie StevensonPublished September 3, 2026Updated October 29, 2026About 15 min read

The Eggshell Plaintiff Rule: When Vulnerability Matters Under Minnesota Law

How the eggshell plaintiff rule and Minnesota IIED law account for vulnerability—and why Cafferty mattered in our case.

Key Takeaways The eggshell plaintiff rule generally holds wrongdoers responsible for harm even when a victim is unusually vulnerable. Under Minnesota IIED law, a defendant’s knowledge of a person’s peculiar…

Read article →

By Craig StevensonPublished September 2, 2026Updated October 27, 2026About 20 min read

The Fairness Files

Before a Jury Hears the Facts: Three Cases at a Procedural Crossroads

Three civil cases trace different paths toward—or away from—a jury. One has now settled before its pending motion was heard.

Svendsen, Starkebaum, and Wynn trace three paths toward—or away from—a civil jury, including Wynn's settlement before its summary-judgment hearing.

Read article →

By Craig StevensonPublished August 29, 2026About 9 min read

The Fairness Files

When the Scales Are Off

What an old grocery-store lesson can teach us about trust in the courts.

What inaccurate grocery-store scales teach us about trust in the courts—and why transparency, consistent standards, and meaningful review matter.

Read article →

By Craig StevensonPublished August 26, 2026Updated October 15, 2026About 19 min read

Distorting the Law

An Order That Answers a Different Motion

Judge Kevin Miller’s August 19 ruling in Svendsen v. Fergus Falls HRA denies a stay without applying a stay standard, leaves the basis of a $999 expense award unexplained, confuses requests for admission with interrogatories, and uses an unqualified catch-all denial.

Update, August 26, 2026: On August 21, Svendsen filed a two-page request for clarification and for permission under Minnesota General Rule of Practice 115.11 to move for reconsideration. The filing largely tracks the…

Read article →

By Craig StevensonPublished August 25, 2026Updated October 29, 2026About 17 min read

Summary Judgment

The Summary Judgment Myth

Judges can end claims—and entire cases—without a trial. Rule 56 forbids them from choosing disputed facts to reach that result. The myth is that the prohibition always prevents it.

Six summary judgment myths obscure Rule 56: courts may end cases without trial, but cannot weigh evidence, choose disputed facts, or draw adverse inferences.

Read article →