121058P.pdf   08/25/2014  Luisa Chavez-Lavagnino  v.  Motivation Education Training
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-1058
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis   
   [PUBLISHED] [Colloton, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and Gruender, 
   Circuit Judge] 
   Civil case - Minnesota Whistleblower Act. There was sufficient evidence to 
   support the jury's conclusion that the plaintiffs refused to engage in 
   activities which would violate 18 U.S.C. Sections 1001(a) and 1002, which 
   prohibit making false representations to and defrauding the federal 
   government; defendant's action in temporarily firing plaintiff Yanez and 
   making her take release time until her firing was rescinded could likely 
   dissuade a reasonable employee from engaging in protected activity; 
   plaintiffs established a causal connection between their protected 
   activity and their firings; while Minnesota has not addressed the issue, 
   it is likely that the Minnesota Supreme Court would hold that a supervisor 
   cannot be individually liable for the tort of wrongful discharge, and the 
   plaintiffs' judgment against defendant Cerna must be reversed; in light of 
   the reversal of the judgment against defendant Cerna, the order granting 
   plaintiffs' motion for pre-judgment interest and attorney's fees must be 
   vacated and remanded for further consideration. Chief Judge Riley, 
   concurring in part and dissenting in part. 
  
121058P.pdf   05/08/2013  Luisa Chavez-Lavagnino  v.  Motivation Education Training
   U.S. Court of Appeals Case No:  12-1058
   U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - Minneapolis   
   [PUBLISHED] [Colloton, Author, with Riley, Chief Judge, and
   Gruender, Circuit Judge]
   Civil case - Civil Procedure. Case remanded for the limited purpose of
   permitting the district court to determine whether the parties were
   completely diverse when the plaintiffs filed their complaint and when
   defendants filed the notice removing the case to federal court; if the court
   finds defendant Cerna was a citizen of Minnesota when the case was filed
   or removed, such that complete diversity was lacking, then the court
   should also determine whether to dismiss her as a dispensable nondiverse
   party pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 21.