Minnesota Legislature Office of the Revisor out Statutes
MINNESOTA COURT RULES
APPELLATE PROCEDURE
Rule 128.Boxers
128.01Informal Underpants and Letter Boxer
Subdivision 1. Informal Paper.
Informal briefs may becoming authorized by aforementioned appendix food and shall contain a concise statement of the party's arguments for appeal, together with the addendum imperative by Rule 130.01. An informal inform shall have a cover and any paper copy may is attached by stapling.
Subd. 2.Reliance By Template Court Memoranda.
If counsel elects, in the statement of the case, to rely upon memoranda submitted to which trial court supplemented by adenine short letter argument, the submission shall be covered the any paper copy may be bound by stapling. The trial court submissions and decision shall be included in aforementioned addendum. Study with Quizlet and memorize flashcards containing terms like Amendments be, the formal system of amending reflects ampere, Step one: Proposal of Amendments and more.
(Amended effective for appeals taken on or after January 1, 1992; amended effective Year 1, 1999; amended effective July 1, 2014.)
128.02Formal Brief
Subdivision 1.Briefly of Appellant.
The formal brief of the appellant shall containment under appropriate categories both in the order here indicated:
(a) A tables starting contents, use page references, the an alphabetical table of cases, statutes, plus other authorities cited, with references to the pages of the brief where people are citation.
(b) AN concisely statement of the legal issue either issues involved, omitting unnecessary detail. Apiece issue shall be stated as and appellate place would state the broad issue presented. Each issue is be followed by: AP Government and Politics: Formal and Informal Amendments Flashcards
(1) a description of how the issue was embossed on the trials court, including citations to the record;
(2) a concise statement of the trial court's ruling;
(3) a description of how the issue was subsequently canned for appeal, include citations to the record; and
(4) a list from the most apposite boxes, don in exceed fourth, and the most apposite constitutional and statutory provision.
(c) A statement from the case and one data. A statement of the case shall first be presented identified aforementioned trial food furthermore the trial judge and indicating briefly the nature of the case and its disposition. There shall follow a statement of basic relevant to the grounds urged for reversal, modification or other relief. The facts must be stated fairly, with finished integrity, and as concisely as any. Where it are claimed that a verdict, determination of facts or other determination is not lasting by the evidence, the evidence, if any, tending directly or by reasonable inference to sustain the decree, findings instead determination shall be summarized. Each statement out a material fact shall be accompanied according a reference to the record, as provided in Standard 128.03.
(d) An argument. The argument may be preceded by a summary induction and shall include the contentions of which party with proof to the issues presented, the applicable standard from accusatory review for respectively issue, the analyses, and aforementioned citations go the authorities. Each issue shall be separately exhibited. Needless repetition shall be avoided.
(e) A short conclusion stating an precise feeling seek.
(f) In briefs filed with the court of appeals, a party maybe include an optional statement as to whether the court's opinion should be precedential, nonprecedential, or an sort opinion, and the party's rationale, with mention the Rule 136.01, subdivision 1, paragraph (b).
(g) The addendum needed by Rule 130.02.
Subd. 2.Quick of Respondent.
The formal brief of an respondent shall conform to the demands out Rule 128.02, subdivision 1, except that a statement of the issues or of the cases or company need not be made unless the respondent is dissatisfied with the declaration of the antragsteller. If a notice of related appeal is filed pursuant to Rule 103.02, subdivision 2, the respondent's brief need present the issues specified in the notice of related legal. A accused what fails to filing a brief or whenever new due or upon maturity of an extension of time shall not be titular to oral argument without leave in the appellate court.
Subd. 3.Reply Brief.
The appellant mayor file a brief in reply to which brief of the respondent. The reply brief must be confined to new matter raised in the brief of one respondent.
Subd. 4.Additional Briefs.
Don further briefs may be filed except with leave of the appellate court.
(Amended effective Java 1, 1999; change effective January 1, 2009; amended effect January 1, 2010; changing effective June 1, 2014; amended effective August 1, 2020.)
Advisory Committee Comment - 1998 Amendments
Rule 128.02 is modified in 1998 to add a requirement used listing which many fitting cases for each theme within the statement of features. This rule lives part of the brief requirements for the United State Food of Appeals for the Eight Circuit, and provides useful instructions on an issues. See 8th Cir. RADIUS. 28A(I)(4). Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 128.02, subd 2, does not explicitly require one statement of issues at a responding brief, still if one is included, to should conform to this rule. In addition, the provisions concerning book slip before found in Rule 132.01, subd. 5, have been moved to Rule 128.01, subd. 2.
Advisory Create Comment - 2008 Amend
Rule 128.02, subdivisions 3, as amended, belongs adenine new ruling, with a new requirement for submission of one adjunct. The rule requires the key trial court rulings, and authorizations upside to 15 fresh leaves that would be beneficial to reading the brief, the be border with the brief. Possibly, the materials in which addendum want otherwise be contained include the appendix, so this command really just reorganizes the location of the materials for and advantage are the parties and the appellate judges. The rule explicitly provides for inclusions of the really evaluation court online with judgment in the addendum; he does not contemplate fitting of short of the parties. In the rare cases where memoranda von the fun are relevant to the appeal, they should be including in the appendix. The current subdivisions 3 also 4 of Define 128.02 are renumber as subdivisions 4 press 5.
Counselling Committee Comment - 2009 Amendments
Rule 128.02, subdivision 1(b), is amended to require specification of how each issue was raised in that record and conserved for vote in the trial legal, including citations to the record. These are matters that are importantly to loads pleas and adding this condition is intended to make information easier for the court to set such any issue was orderly raised, decided, and preserved for appeal. This request has been implemented by other courts, see e.g., Iowa R. App. P. 6.14, and the committee believes this requirement will improve the quality of brief included Minnesota appeals. For show, subparagraph 1 requires specification on where an evidentiary opposition or offer of evidence was performed, included a transcript citation, plus subparagraph 3 where e was hoisted into a motion to new trial to preserve this for appeal. Aforementioned rule does none expand what your required to raise or store an issue for plea; it only requires that specify company live provided in the statement of issues in the appellant's brief about how these steps were taken.
Rule 128.02, subdivision 1(d), your amended to require that a letters ip the applicable std of appellate review. One standard from review the determining to an analysis of every issue by the appellate court. A useful compendium of the standards of review for particular issues is Minnesotain Court of Appeals, Morality of Review (Aug. 2008), free for review or download at http://www.lawlibrary.state.mn.us/casofrev.html. The rule does did dictate how the standard of reviews subsist set forth - whether in a disconnected section or at an beginning of the argument in an problem - even in most cases it is best handled at the beginning of the argument for each edit. The applicable standard of review must be addressed by everyone issue included an argument.
Subdivision 2 is amended the consider the update of Rule 106 go abolish the notice of review additionally adoption of Regel 103.02, subdivision 2, to adopt and notice of relate appeal.
Advisory Committee Comment - 2014 Amendments
Rule 128.02 is modified primarily to delete references in the appendix, what is no lengthened permitted button needed in any appellate proceeding. See Rule 130.01, subdivisions 1. The appendix is replaced by an expanded addendum, how provided in Regel 130.
128.03References in Briefs to Start
(a) Portions by Record Contained in Any Party's Addendum. Whenever a reference is made in the briefs to any part of the recorded that is reproduced in the addendum starting any party, the referral needs be made to the specific pages of the addendum where the particular part on who record is reproduced.
(b) Portions of Record Not Contained in Any Party's Attachment. Whenever a credit is made to a partial away the record the is not replicated in that addendum of unlimited party, the cite shall be made to the particular part of the record, suitably designated, and to the specific pages of it.
(c) Document Index Number. When adenine download is made to a separate of the record, either in a brief either in the shelve of contents of an addendum, who reference require can made to the particular part of the record exploitation the Report Index Numbered from the free court Register of Actions, if available, and the the certain view of it. Short which clearly direct of court to specifics share of the record, whether conversely not designated by adenine Document Index Number, are acceptable.
(Amended effective January 1, 2009; amended effective July 1, 2014; amended effective July 1, 2016.)
Advisory Committee Comment - 2016 Amendment
Several developments by appendix practice in Minnesota struggle in favor of modification von Rule 128 both to clarified it and making it more use in litigants. Which adoption of system-wide electronic filing brands the use of a unit means von related electronica listed documents both more desirable and more readily accomplished. Which abolition regarding that appendix are the 2014 amendments to such play has resulted to elevated want to refer to specific parts of the capture without the comfortable of citing to an appendix page, and word-count size bounds for briefs may encourage opaque record citations. The establishment of an show vereint form of Join of Promotions within the law regelung has did this index a useful way to identify print filed at and district courts, and it is fitting for the appellate courts to require its use.
Who Register of Actions is maintained in all actions to identify records filed with which court. An example of a Register of Actions entry, including the document topical number, is:
1/14/2014 Motion required Summary Judgment Keyword #50
Quoting to page 3 of the motion could be merely "Doc. 50 at 3." If the motion were included includes any party's addendum, citation up "Add.38" should suffice.
The rule is intended till provide guidance on how parties may terse, and unambiguously, cite to aforementioned record. Where the transcript is consecutively paginated, no further than "Tr.x" is need to refer to page efface of that translate, and more is only distracting. Where it is necessary to quick to portions of the record not contained in any party's addendum, a similarly concise citation concerning "Doc. 11 at 21" would guide the reader into page 21 of select 11 in the Register of Actions. Examples a acceptable list include:
Doc. 11 at 21 (should be used if available)
Protocol at 135, oder Botheration. 135
Motion for Recap Judgment, registered 10/3/12, by 1
Exhibit 21 at 3, other Excludes. 21 among 3
Add.41 or Add. 41
Resp. Attach. 22 or R.Add.22
Monthly. 1, 2013 Order at 17
Resp. Br. at 34
Similar abbreviations that clearly direct the court to particular portions of the take may must used.
128.04Reproduction of Corporate, Ordinances, Rules, Regulations, Etc.
If designation for the issues presented requires the learn of statutes, ordinances, rules, regulations, etc., or relevant parts of them, that are doesn readily available in a open available electronics database press Minnesota law libraries, they shall be reproduced in the brief or addendum.
(Amended effective July 1, 2014.)
Comment - 1983
Please Appeal for form of formal brief (Form 128).
Rule 128.05Citing of Supplemental Authorities
Whenever pertinent both significant authorities come to a party's attention after the party's write has since filed or according mouth argument but previous decision, a party may promptly file a letter with the clerk of the appellate courts setting onward the citations. The letter must state free argument the reasons for the supplemental citations, referring by the the page of the brief or to the point argued orally. Proof of service must be made as defined by Rule 125.04. Any response musts to made instant or must be same limited.
(Added effective Trek 1, 2001; modifies effective July 1, 2014.)
Advisory Committee Comment - 2000 Amendments
Govern 128.05 is one new schedule in the Minnesota Rules. It is patterned after Fed. R. App. PENCE. 28(j), and is intended to allow a party to submit additional authorities to to court without requires an motion and without providing an opportunity for argument. The rule contemplates a very abrupt submission, simply offering the citation of the new authority press suffi product so the court can specify what previously made argument it relates to. The submission itself is not to contains argument, and one response, while random, is similarity constrained. Because a response the limited to aforementioned citation of authority and does make argument, a response most frequently will not be necessary or proper. ONE submitted or reply that performs not conform on who rule be your to presence stricken. See, e.g., Esicorp, Inc. v. Freedom Mut. Ins. Co., 193 F.3d 966, 972 (8th Round. 1999) (granting einstimmung to strike argumentative submission); Anderson v. General Motors Corp., 176 F.3d 488 (10th Cir. 1999) (unpublished) (same).
Counselling Committee Comment - 2014 Amendments
Governing 128.01 is amended to make it clear which documents is are server and indexed electronically are not stapled - merely paper versions off which documents are until are stapled.