Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 15.472 (2026)

Fees And Expenses; Civil Action Or Contested Case Proceeding Involving State

✓ current as of May 2026

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

(a) If a prevailing party other than the state, in a civil action or contested case proceeding other than a tort action, brought by or against the state, shows that the position of the state was not substantially justified, the court or administrative law judge shall award fees and other expenses to the party unless special circumstances make an award unjust.

(b) A party seeking an award of fees and other expenses shall, within 30 days of final judgment in the action, submit to the court or administrative law judge an application of fees and other expenses which shows that the party is a prevailing party and is eligible to receive an award, and the amount sought, including an itemized statement from any attorney or expert witness representing or appearing on behalf of the party stating the actual time expended and the rate at which fees and other expenses were computed. The party shall also allege that the position of the state was not substantially justified.

(c) The court or administrative law judge may reduce the amount to be awarded under this section, or deny an award, to the extent that the prevailing party during the proceedings engaged in conduct that unduly and unreasonably protracted the final resolution of the matter in controversy. The decision of an administrative law judge under this section must be made a part of the record containing the final decision of the agency and must include written findings and conclusions.

(d) This section does not preclude a party from recovering costs, disbursements, fees, and expenses under other applicable law.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 12 cases, 1996–2016 · leading case: Comm'r of Revenue, Relator v. Dahmes Stainless, Inc., 884 N.W.2d 648 (Minn. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Comm'r of Revenue, Relator v. Dahmes Stainless, Inc., 884 N.W.2d 648 (Minn. 2016). · cites it 58× “• See Minn.Stat, § 15.472. 2 The tax court held that the Commissioner’s position was not “substantially justified” by a “reasonable basis in law and fact,” Minn.”

In Re Rosckes v. Cnty. of Carver, 783 N.W.2d 220 (Minn. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 10× “Appellant-trustee, on his own behalf and on behalf of the decedent’s estate, argues that funds in the decedent’s trust were not available to her for purposes of determining medical-assistance eligibility, and also seeks to recover fees and other costs from the state under…”

In re Pera Salary Determinations Affecting Retired & Active Employees, 820 N.W.2d 563 (Minn. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 6× “” Minn.Stat. § 15.472(a) (2010). Relators were not the prevailing parties in the administrative review proceedings that led to the PERA board’s decision.”

Save Mille Lacs Sportsfishing, Inc. v. Minnesota Dep't of Nat. Resources, 859 N.W.2d 845 (Minn. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 4× “” Minn. Stat. § 15.472 (a) (2014). Because petitioners have not established any basis for relief, we do not address this issue.”

Healthstar Home Health, Inc. v. Jesson, 827 N.W.2d 444 (Minn. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 3× “Does Minn.Stat. § 256B.0659, subd. 11(c) (Supp.”

Lund v. Comm'r of Pub. Saf., 783 N.W.2d 142 (Minn. 2010). · cites it 2× “In addition, the Minnesota Equal Access to Justice Act (MEAJA) entitles certain prevailing parties in non-tort civil cases brought by or against the State to "fees and other expenses” if the State’s position in the litigation was "not substantially justified,” Minn.Stat. §…”

Wilson v. Comm'r of Revenue, 707 N.W.2d 695 (Minn. 2006). · cites it 6× “See Minn.Stat. § 15.472 (2004); Minn.Stat. § 271.”

Claim of City of Mankato v. Mahoney, 542 N.W.2d 689 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “” Minn.Stat. § 15.472(a). Thus, the question is whether MEAJA allows Mahoney to obtain fees against a municipality like the city.”

Mbong v. New Horizons Nursing, 608 N.W.2d 890 (Minn. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “She also requests fees and expenses under the Minnesota Equal Access to Justice Act (MEAJA), Minn.Stat. § 15.472 (1998), which permits an award of fees and other expenses in a “civil action or contested case” brought against the state if the position of the state is not…”

State, Campaign Fin. & Pub. Disclosure Bd. v. Minnesota Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party, 671 N.W.2d 894 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003). “§ 15.472(a) (2002). As defined by the MEAJA, “substantially justified” means “that the state’s position had a reasonable basis in law and faet[] based on the totality of the circumstances before and during the litigation or contested case proceedings.”

Raisanen v. Cnty. of Hennepin, 678 N.W.2d 669 (Minn. 2004). · cites it 2× “Finally, he argues that he is entitled to costs under Minn. Stat § 15.472(a) (2002). With respect to Raisanen’s argument that his motion for costs and disbursements was timely, we conclude that the tax court did not err.”

Minnesota Voters All. v. State of Minnesota (Minn. Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “” Minn. Stat. § 15.472 (a). “‘Substantially justified’ means that the state’s position had a reasonable basis in law and fact, based on the totality of the circumstances before and during the litigation or 6 contested case proceeding.”

— Minn. Stat. § 15.472(a) — 7 cases

In Re Rosckes v. Cnty. of Carver, 783 N.W.2d 220 (Minn. Ct. App. 2010). “Appellant-trustee, on his own behalf and on behalf of the decedent’s estate, argues that funds in the decedent’s trust were not available to her for purposes of determining medical-assistance eligibility, and also seeks to recover fees and other costs from the state under…”

Comm'r of Revenue, Relator v. Dahmes Stainless, Inc., 884 N.W.2d 648 (Minn. 2016). “• See Minn.Stat, § 15.472. 2 The tax court held that the Commissioner’s position was not “substantially justified” by a “reasonable basis in law and fact,” Minn.”

In re Pera Salary Determinations Affecting Retired & Active Employees, 820 N.W.2d 563 (Minn. Ct. App. 2012). “” Minn.Stat. § 15.472(a) (2010). Relators were not the prevailing parties in the administrative review proceedings that led to the PERA board’s decision.”

Claim of City of Mankato v. Mahoney, 542 N.W.2d 689 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996). “” Minn.Stat. § 15.472(a). Thus, the question is whether MEAJA allows Mahoney to obtain fees against a municipality like the city.”

Wilson v. Comm'r of Revenue, 707 N.W.2d 695 (Minn. 2006). “See Minn.Stat. § 15.472 (2004); Minn.Stat. § 271.”

— Minn. Stat. § 15.472(b) — 1 case

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.