context: The reasoning underlying Monessen was that prejudgment interest is a part of damages, which are "inseparably connected with the right of action" under FELA.
citation_a.signal: see also
citation_a.identifier: 65 N.W.2d 900, 904
citation_a.parenthetical: holding that "costs and disbursements" are a "procedural element" separate from the concept of "just compensation" under the Minnesota Constitution
citation_a.sentence: See Lienhard v. State, 431 N.W.2d 861, 864-65 (Minn.1988) (distinguishing prejudgment interest, which is “directly proportional to the magnitude of damages sustained by the claimant,” from costs and disbursements, which “are not part of the claim for compensation of personal injury”); see also State ex rel. Burnquist v. Miller Home Dev., 243 Minn. 1, 7, 65 N.W.2d 900, 904 (1954) (holding that “costs and disbursements” are a “procedural element” separate from the concept of “just compensation” under the Minnesota Constitution)."
citation_b.signal: see
citation_b.identifier: 431 N.W.2d 861, 864-65
citation_b.parenthetical: distinguishing prejudgment interest, which is "directly proportional to the magnitude of damages sustained by the claimant," from costs and disbursements, which "are not part of the claim for compensation of personal injury"
citation_b.sentence: See Lienhard v. State, 431 N.W.2d 861, 864-65 (Minn.1988) (distinguishing prejudgment interest, which is “directly proportional to the magnitude of damages sustained by the claimant,” from costs and disbursements, which “are not part of the claim for compensation of personal injury”); see also State ex rel. Burnquist v. Miller Home Dev., 243 Minn. 1, 7, 65 N.W.2d 900, 904 (1954) (holding that “costs and disbursements” are a “procedural element” separate from the concept of “just compensation” under the Minnesota Constitution)."