Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 14.68 (2026)

Procedure On Review

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

The review shall be confined to the record, except that in cases of alleged irregularities in procedure, not shown in the record, the court of appeals may transfer the case to the district court for the county in which the agency has its principal office or the county in which the contested case hearing was held. The district court shall have jurisdiction to take testimony and to hear and determine the alleged irregularities in procedure. Appeal from the district court determination may be taken to the court of appeals as in other civil cases.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 12 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1984–2023 · leading case: Hard Times Cafe, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis, 625 N.W.2d 165 (Minn. Ct. App. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Hard Times Cafe, Inc. v. City of Minneapolis, 625 N.W.2d 165 (Minn. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 6× “Relator contends that the only way this court can determine whether the procedures were unlawful is to consider the extra-record materials submitted by relator.”

Minneapolis Police Dep't v. Minneapolis Comm'n on Civil Rights, 425 N.W.2d 235 (Minn. 1988). · cites it 4× “We judge these minutes not to be a part of the record as mandated by Minn.Stat. § 14.68, and explicated in R.Civ.”

Manufactured Hous. Inst. v. Pettersen, 347 N.W.2d 238 (Minn. 1984). · cites it 2× “In a contested case, Minn.Stat. § 14.68 (1982) says that judicial review “shall be confined to the record, except in cases of alleged irregularities in procedure, not shown on the record * * But where, as here, there is a pre-enforcement challenge, judicial review is governed by…”

In Re Occupational License of Hutchinson, 440 N.W.2d 171 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “See Minn.Stat. § 14.68 (1988). The ease is now before us following the district court’s decision against appellant.”

Fredrich v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 720, 465 N.W.2d 692 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “See Minn.Stat. § 14.68 (1988). Therefore, we do not review this issue.”

Resolution Revoking License 000337 West Side Pawn—880 South Robert Street, 587 N.W.2d 521 (Minn. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 14.68 (1996). The evidence before the city council at the April 13 hearing included: (1) the investigation report; (2) the letter sent to relator; (3) a memorandum from the chief of police to the city clerk noting that the exchange of firearms violated a city…”

Application of N. States Power Co., 440 N.W.2d 138 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 4× “Remand is therefore appropriate for a more definitive decision on the disputed costs of decommissioning the three nuclear facilities.”

Rindahl v. St. Louis Cnty. Welfare Bd., 437 N.W.2d 686 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 14.68 (1986). On appeal, the court may affirm the decision of the agency or remand the case for further proceedings; or it may reverse or modify the decision if the substantial rights of the petitioners may have been prejudiced because the administrative finding,…”

In Re Combined Air & Solid Waste Permit No. 2211-91-OT-1 for the Dakota Cnty. Mixed Mun. Solid Waste Incinerator, 483 N.W.2d 105 (Minn. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 4× “See Minn.Stat. § 14.68 (1990). DECISION Certiorari review in this court is limited to the existing record except that in cases of alleged irregularities in procedure, not shown in the record, the court of appeals may transfer the case to the district court for the county in…”

In the Matter of 2015 Class C License Application of Dr. Mohamed El Deeb. (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “at 174-75 ; see Minn. Stat. § 14.68 (2014) (“[I]n cases of alleged irregularities in procedure, not shown in the record, the [c]ourt of [a]ppeals may transfer the case to the district court for the county in which the agency has its principal office or the county in which the…”

In the Matter of Issuance of Air Emissions Permit No. 13700345-101 for PolyMet Mining, Inc., City of Hoyt Lakes, St. ... (Minn. Ct. App. 2023). · cites it 2× “Minn. Stat. § 14.68 . But this rule is not absolute.”

Sleepy Eye Care Ctr. v. Comm'r of Human Servs., 572 N.W.2d 766 (Minn. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 2× “See Minn.Stat. § 14.68 (1996) (judicial review of contested case decision).”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.