Skip to main content Skip to office menu Skip to footer
Capital IconMinnesota Legislature

HF 213

as introduced - 86th Legislature (2009 - 2010) Posted on 02/09/2010 01:34am

KEY: stricken = removed, old language.
underscored = added, new language.
Line numbers 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6
1.7 1.8 1.9 1.10 1.11 1.12 1.13 1.14 1.15 1.16 1.17 1.18 1.19 1.20 1.21

A bill for an act
relating to crime; prohibiting use of arrest records for private employment
purposes; providing immunity from negligent hiring as it relates to use of
criminal records; imposing state liability; proposing coding for new law in
Minnesota Statutes, chapter 364.

BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF MINNESOTA:

Section 1.

new text begin [364.20] USE OF CRIMINAL RECORDS BY PRIVATE EMPLOYERS;
IMMUNITY FROM CIVIL LIABILITY.
new text end

new text begin Subdivision 1. new text end

new text begin Use of nonconviction records for private employment. new text end

new text begin It is an
unlawful discriminatory practice, unless specifically required or permitted by statute, for a
private employer to ask for, in any form of employment application or otherwise, or to
take adverse action based on an arrest, citation, or criminal complaint against an individual
not then pending and which was not followed by a valid conviction.
new text end

new text begin Subd. 2. new text end

new text begin Immunity from civil liability. new text end

new text begin A private employer is immune from civil
liability for negligent hiring or employing an individual with a criminal record, to the
extent that the criminal record as of the date of hire is the basis for the liability, if the
employer in employing the individual has complied with the provisions applicable to
public employers set forth in section 364.03, subdivisions 2 and 3.
new text end

new text begin Subd. 3. new text end

new text begin State liability. new text end

new text begin Any person or entity injured by the action of an employee
with a criminal record shall have the right to sue the state for damages as they would have
been able to collect from the employer if it were not for subdivision 2.
new text end