Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 181. EMPLOYMENT
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 181.76 (2026)

Disclosure Of Lie Detector Tests Prohibited

✓ text as last checked Sept. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

No person shall disclose that another person has taken a polygraph or any test purporting to test honesty or the results of that test except to the individual tested. If such a test is given after August 1, 1973 and at the employee's request, the results may be given only to persons authorized by the employee to receive the results. A person who violates this section is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1981–1994 · leading case: Jeffers v. Convoy Co., 636 F. Supp. 1337 (D. Minn. 1986).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Jeffers v. Convoy Co., 636 F. Supp. 1337 (D. Minn. 1986). · cites it 12× “§ 181.76. They contend that plaintiff has failed to state a claim upon which relief can be granted because there is no private right of action for violations of § 181.”
State by Spannaus v. Century Camera, Inc., 309 N.W.2d 735 (Minn. 1981). · cites it 6× “Minn.Stat. § 181.76 (1980) reads: No person shall disclose that another person has taken a polygraph or any test purporting to test honesty or the results of that test except to the individual tested.”
Jeffers v. Convoy Co., 650 F. Supp. 315 (D. Minn. 1986). · cites it 9× “§ 181.76 is negligence per se because as an employee, he is within the intended protection of the statute.”
H.J. Inc. v. Nw. Bell Corp., 420 N.W.2d 673 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “1986) (holding no private cause of action exists under Minn.Stat. § 181.76 because its express terms do not so provide).”
Doe v. Brainerd Int'l Raceway, Inc., 514 N.W.2d 811 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 6× “1986), raised by respondents, the court rejected the argument that a violation of the polygraph statute, Minn.Stat. § 181.76, gave rise to a civil cause of action because a similar statute, Minn.”
Alexander v. Eilers, 422 N.W.2d 312 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 2× “The statute further provides for investigation of suspected violations by the Department of Labor and Industry with appropriate civil, criminal and injunctive relief.”
Hanson v. Bros. & One, 491 N.W.2d 292 (Minn. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 181.76 (1990) prohibits individuals from disclosing the results of polygraph tests of another individual.”
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.