context: Because there is no constitutional right to a jury trial for claims brought under Minn.Stat. SS 176.82, subd. 1, the next task is to determine whether the statute itself provides a jury trial right. Minnesota courts have recognized that the Legislature has chosen to withhold the right to a jury trial in Minn.Stat. SS 176.82, subd. 1.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 227 Minn. 434, 434
citation_a.parenthetical: concluding that a remedy provided by the WCA did not include the right a jury trial
citation_a.sentence: See Minn.Stat. § 176.301 (2012) (“When a workers’ compensation issue is present in the district court action, the court may try the action itself without a jury, or refer the matter to the chief administrative law judge for assignment to a compensation judge.” (emphasis added)); see also Breimhorst, 227 Minn. at 434, 35 N.W.2d at 734 (concluding that a remedy provided by the WCA did not include the right a jury trial).
citation_b.signal: no signal
citation_b.identifier: 484 N.W.2d 423, 427
citation_b.parenthetical: concluding that a jury trial was not required because "section 176.82 has no element of a common law claim which could otherwise support the right to a jury trial"
citation_b.sentence: Snesrud v. Instant Web, Inc., 484 N.W.2d 423, 427 (Minn.App.1992) (concluding that a jury trial was not required because “section 176.82 has no element of a common law claim which could otherwise support the right to a jury trial”), rev. denied (Minn. June 17, 1992).