Daniel Suitor
@dansuitor.bsky.social
Former and occasional tenants rights attorney. Landlords do not @ me. New England then, Minneapolis now, housing and economic justice forever.
I'm convinced that the CEO of Costco threatening to kill a subordinate if he raised the price of the hot dog + soda combo is the only good thing a C-suiter has ever done
November 10, 2025 at 7:04 PM
I'm convinced that the CEO of Costco threatening to kill a subordinate if he raised the price of the hot dog + soda combo is the only good thing a C-suiter has ever done
First, the COA goes through each of those claims and unequivocally debunks them. Then, in an incredible, concurrence, Judge JaPaul Harris thoroughly documents how "the district court’s credibility findings appear consistent with several sexual-assault myths" which "erodes access to justice"
![First, the record conflicts with the district court’s finding that Iverson “never called the police.” Two days after the third alleged assault, Iverson drove to the police station to make a report. The Police Chief recommended that Iverson file an OFP petition, which she did. While Iverson did not contact the police by using a phone (i.e., Iverson did not actually call the police), the district court’s implicit finding that Iverson never contacted the police is clearly erroneous.1
Second, the district court’s finding that Iverson never told her friends about the assaults has no support in the record. The testimony is silent on this issue. Vanhouse’s counsel candidly conceded at oral argument before this court that the record was silent on whether Iverson reported her assaults to friends.2 Given the lack of any record support, this finding is clearly erroneous.
1 The fact that Iverson did not report the prior alleged assaults is consistent with the unfortunate statistics about the reporting of domestic abuse incidents. See State v. Tapper, 993 N.W.2d 432, 448 (Minn. 2023) (“[L]ess than half of domestic abuse incidents are even reported.”) (Chutich, J., dissenting).
2 We appreciate counsel’s candor on this point.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:ccm7gttkbfs2eyyrlpshmeun/bafkreifv7bdsth4rcgfy32lpgz5rztmvfxbkcecn5xd7cjjsmilaeeagsm@jpeg)
November 10, 2025 at 4:53 PM
First, the COA goes through each of those claims and unequivocally debunks them. Then, in an incredible, concurrence, Judge JaPaul Harris thoroughly documents how "the district court’s credibility findings appear consistent with several sexual-assault myths" which "erodes access to justice"
In the case, a District Court referee refused to consider evidence of the petitioner's housing instability and the respondent's threats of eviction, and believed her alleged abuser that the sexual encounters were consensual.
On appeal, the COA held that all of the court's findings were flat wrong.
On appeal, the COA held that all of the court's findings were flat wrong.
![In an order and memorandum—written by the referee and countersigned by the district court judge—the district court denied the OFP. The district court declined to address Iverson’s allegations of threats to her housing situation, finding that “[t]he housing issues, and whether eviction laws were followed, is not before the [district court] in the current proceeding.” In addressing Iverson’s sexual assault allegations, the district court found Vanhouse’s testimony was more credible than Iverson’s testimony:
The [district court] finds [Vanhouse’s] testimony regarding the consensual nature of the sexual encounters to be more believable than [Iverson’s]. [Iverson] never called the police, never reported the activity to friends, admits that she had orgasms during the encounters, and talked nicely about [Vanhouse] on a social media site for single women. The [district court] believes that both parties have regret that they tried to rekindle their sexual relationship, but the [district court] does not believe the encounters were abusive.
Iverson filed a motion for amended findings, asking the district court to reevaluate the issue of her housing insecurity. The district court denied Iverson’s motion, finding that Iverson’s “testimony at trial did not give rise to a credible threat of housing insecurity.”](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:ccm7gttkbfs2eyyrlpshmeun/bafkreihovrg22lew7cfyolat4lc337ug7cr3doir5vmobt4l474wgmgwm4@jpeg)
![In finding that Vanhouse’s testimony was more credible than Iverson’s testimony regarding the consensual nature of the sexual encounters, the district court made four factual findings:
(1) Iverson “never called the police”;
(2) Iverson “never reported the activity to friends”;
7
(3) Iverson admitted “that she had orgasms during the encounters”; and
(4) Iverson “talked nicely about [Vanhouse] on a social media site for single women.”
Our thorough review of the record reveals that none of these underlying factual findings, upon which the credibility determination was based, are “reasonably supported by the evidence as a whole.” Id.](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:ccm7gttkbfs2eyyrlpshmeun/bafkreie4puan7xbxklnbzs624frilu4u4jglsyptn3j3dy54bekgx5riia@jpeg)
November 10, 2025 at 4:42 PM
In the case, a District Court referee refused to consider evidence of the petitioner's housing instability and the respondent's threats of eviction, and believed her alleged abuser that the sexual encounters were consensual.
On appeal, the COA held that all of the court's findings were flat wrong.
On appeal, the COA held that all of the court's findings were flat wrong.
In the decision below, the petitioner (person seeking a protective order) alleged that she'd moved in with the father of her children because of her housing instability, and that he sexually assaulted her under the threat of eviction. She reported him to the police and sought an Order for Protection
November 10, 2025 at 4:36 PM
In the decision below, the petitioner (person seeking a protective order) alleged that she'd moved in with the father of her children because of her housing instability, and that he sexually assaulted her under the threat of eviction. She reported him to the police and sought an Order for Protection
Minnesota Appellate Court Watch: a quiet week on the docket overall, but punctuated by one of the loudest cases I've seen in a while. A reversal of the denial of an Order for Protection that is as searing as our appellate courts ever get.
CW: domestic abuse, sexual extortion, housing instability
CW: domestic abuse, sexual extortion, housing instability
November 10, 2025 at 4:27 PM
Minnesota Appellate Court Watch: a quiet week on the docket overall, but punctuated by one of the loudest cases I've seen in a while. A reversal of the denial of an Order for Protection that is as searing as our appellate courts ever get.
CW: domestic abuse, sexual extortion, housing instability
CW: domestic abuse, sexual extortion, housing instability
Happy "finally cold enough to fuck with your tire pressure" Day to all who celebrate
November 10, 2025 at 3:15 PM
Happy "finally cold enough to fuck with your tire pressure" Day to all who celebrate
Minnesota really out here with snow in the second week of November to remind you that winter will soon be here and someday you will die
November 9, 2025 at 7:16 AM
Minnesota really out here with snow in the second week of November to remind you that winter will soon be here and someday you will die
same phrase scansions with the TMNT logo
November 8, 2025 at 8:46 PM
same phrase scansions with the TMNT logo
new GFM to build taylr a Kenwood Killdozer
November 8, 2025 at 8:07 PM
new GFM to build taylr a Kenwood Killdozer
Keith's review is spot-on, but I want to bring two of my little notes from the comments out.
November 7, 2025 at 11:38 PM
Keith's review is spot-on, but I want to bring two of my little notes from the comments out.
no partial measures. 359 county commissioners or bust
November 7, 2025 at 6:17 PM
no partial measures. 359 county commissioners or bust
Per UMN's website, upper division students will have to take one ConLaw class to graduate off of a list that includes more civil rights courses. But that still removes a foundational course from the 1L curriculum and halvesthe amount of ConLaw someone takes to graduate
law.umn.edu/curriculum-r...
law.umn.edu/curriculum-r...
November 7, 2025 at 3:49 PM
Per UMN's website, upper division students will have to take one ConLaw class to graduate off of a list that includes more civil rights courses. But that still removes a foundational course from the 1L curriculum and halvesthe amount of ConLaw someone takes to graduate
law.umn.edu/curriculum-r...
law.umn.edu/curriculum-r...
Is it a good sign for the health of our country that the my law school dropped Constitutional Law as a required class?
November 7, 2025 at 3:25 PM
Is it a good sign for the health of our country that the my law school dropped Constitutional Law as a required class?
Becka, please, pay for an audit of the election results so Aurin can increase her margin, it would be the funniest thing ever
November 7, 2025 at 3:22 PM
Becka, please, pay for an audit of the election results so Aurin can increase her margin, it would be the funniest thing ever
Jacob Frey still couldn't get more votes in 2025 than rent control did in 2021.
November 7, 2025 at 1:36 PM
Jacob Frey still couldn't get more votes in 2025 than rent control did in 2021.
I don't know Duluth's process, so I don't know when this ordinance will take effect. But it passed by an incredible margin, +37%. A 69% result in a 41% renter city. Remarkable. As evidenced for years, tenants rights are popular across the spectrum. Something our officials down here should emulate.
November 6, 2025 at 4:30 PM
I don't know Duluth's process, so I don't know when this ordinance will take effect. But it passed by an incredible margin, +37%. A 69% result in a 41% renter city. Remarkable. As evidenced for years, tenants rights are popular across the spectrum. Something our officials down here should emulate.
Here's an incredible election result that's being slept on: Duluth passed a first-in-the-state Tenants Right to Repair ordinance! TakeAction MN and its ascendant Duluth Tenants Union fought hard for this ballot question and won a huge victory for tenants rights in a market which really needs it
November 6, 2025 at 4:07 PM
Here's an incredible election result that's being slept on: Duluth passed a first-in-the-state Tenants Right to Repair ordinance! TakeAction MN and its ascendant Duluth Tenants Union fought hard for this ballot question and won a huge victory for tenants rights in a market which really needs it
Interestingly, one judge on the panel published an over 20 years ago about a landmark negligence case concerning landlord liability, discussing a "duty upon landlords to re-inspect the premises, even if a building inspector . . . previously conducted an inspection and had found no code violations"
November 6, 2025 at 3:39 PM
Interestingly, one judge on the panel published an over 20 years ago about a landmark negligence case concerning landlord liability, discussing a "duty upon landlords to re-inspect the premises, even if a building inspector . . . previously conducted an inspection and had found no code violations"
On appeal, the City Attorney's office is arguing that any dispute about habitability is actually a breach of contract claim, which the City cannot consider. AND that simply having a valid certificate of occupancy is an ironclad, insurmountable defense to a habitability claim.
I find this...... weak
I find this...... weak
November 6, 2025 at 3:30 PM
On appeal, the City Attorney's office is arguing that any dispute about habitability is actually a breach of contract claim, which the City cannot consider. AND that simply having a valid certificate of occupancy is an ironclad, insurmountable defense to a habitability claim.
I find this...... weak
I find this...... weak
The City, meanwhile, said "an inspection was done a year-and-a half ago, and the unit has a valid certificate of occupancy, so it is obviously in compliance with the law."
![On January 7, 2025, the LHO released a recommendation3 in which she
recommended denying Relators’ appeal. (Doc. 15). In the recommendation, the LHO noted
that it was “possible that fact finding in th[e] complaints” Relators had filed prior to the
hearing “would touch on issues covered in this appeal.” (Doc. 15 at 183). However, the
LHO did not recommend delaying any final appeal decision until Relators’ identified
concerns could be investigated or resolved. Instead, the LHO put aside Realtors’
documented evidence of recent heat deficiencies and relied on a building inspection that
had occurred in April 2023, over one and half years prior, to conclude that Respondent
Landlord’s building, and specifically Mr. Bush’s rental unit, were in compliance with the
implied warranty of habitability. (Id.). In her recommendation, the LHO also concluded
that Relators’ garage parking costs were part of rent for purposes of the Ordinance. (Id. at
184). But the LHO did not offer a recommendation on, or even discuss, Relators’ argument
that Respondent Landlord’s August 2024 rent increase—which was in excess of 3%
precisely because parking costs had been raised—must be considered as part of their
appeal. (See Doc. 15).](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:ccm7gttkbfs2eyyrlpshmeun/bafkreies3fza7u5wriau5vg7mpt3kmlnq5nx6uogyphf2sbyg4nyv2ah7e@jpeg)
November 6, 2025 at 3:25 PM
The City, meanwhile, said "an inspection was done a year-and-a half ago, and the unit has a valid certificate of occupancy, so it is obviously in compliance with the law."
In this case, the landlord failed to comply with the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 504B.161, subd. 1(a)(5) to provide "heat at a minimum temperature of 68 degrees Fahrenheit in all places intended for habitation" during the cold season.
November 6, 2025 at 3:23 PM
In this case, the landlord failed to comply with the requirements of Minn. Stat. § 504B.161, subd. 1(a)(5) to provide "heat at a minimum temperature of 68 degrees Fahrenheit in all places intended for habitation" during the cold season.
The biggest issue is the City basically throwing up its hands and refusing to consider things that it are specifically required by the law. Namely, that regardless of any other factors, a landlord cannot increase the rent >3% if they're not in compliance with state law governing habitability
November 6, 2025 at 3:20 PM
The biggest issue is the City basically throwing up its hands and refusing to consider things that it are specifically required by the law. Namely, that regardless of any other factors, a landlord cannot increase the rent >3% if they're not in compliance with state law governing habitability
Minnesota Appellate Court Watch: somehow I missed the filing of this case back in March, but back in October the Court of Appeals heard arguments in the first-ever appellate review of the St. Paul Rent Stabilization ordinance.
November 6, 2025 at 3:13 PM
Minnesota Appellate Court Watch: somehow I missed the filing of this case back in March, but back in October the Court of Appeals heard arguments in the first-ever appellate review of the St. Paul Rent Stabilization ordinance.
Park Board RCV is different and more complicated, and we don't have the exact flow traced to candidates yet, but it seems like the heterodox (I bought it!) Schneider-to-Wilson pipeline didn't materialize. In the round Adam's 7,494 votes went out, Wilson only picked up 2,784. Thought it'd break more
November 5, 2025 at 8:57 PM
Park Board RCV is different and more complicated, and we don't have the exact flow traced to candidates yet, but it seems like the heterodox (I bought it!) Schneider-to-Wilson pipeline didn't materialize. In the round Adam's 7,494 votes went out, Wilson only picked up 2,784. Thought it'd break more