# Kidwell v. Sybaritic, Inc.

> Supreme Court of Minnesota · June 24, 2010 · 784 N.W.2d 220

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9721135

## Case

- **Full name:** Brian F. KIDWELL, Appellant, v. SYBARITIC, INC., Respondent
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Minnesota
- **Decided:** June 24, 2010
- **Citations:** 784 N.W.2d 220; 30 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1692; 2010 Minn. LEXIS 335; 2010 WL 2517682
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Page
- **Judges:** Meyer, Anderson, Paul, Gildea, Magnuson
- **Cited by:** 31 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9721135

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that an “employee cannot be said to have ‘blown the whistle’” under Minnesota’s whistleblower statute “when the employee’s report is made because it is the employee’s job to investigate and report wrongdoing”
- stating that when a company’s in-house counsel advises the company on compliance issues, “the lawyer is not sending a report for the purpose of exposing an illegality and the lawyer is not blowing the whistle”

## Opinion text

PAGE, Justice
(dissenting).
I join in the dissent of Justice Paul H. Anderson.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9721135. Public record. Not legal advice.