Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 211B.32 (2026)

Complaints Of Unfair Campaign Practices

✓ current as of May 2026

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

Subdivision 1.Administrative remedy; exhaustion.

(a) Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c), a complaint alleging a violation of chapter 211A or 211B must be filed with the office. The complaint must be finally disposed of by the office before the alleged violation may be prosecuted by a county attorney.

(b) Complaints arising under those sections and related to those individuals and associations specified in section 10A.022, subdivision 3, must be filed with the Campaign Finance and Public Disclosure Board.

Subd. 2.Limitation on filing.

The complaint must be filed with the office within one year after the occurrence of the act or failure to act that is the subject of the complaint, except that if the act or failure to act involves fraud, concealment, or misrepresentation that could not be discovered during that one-year period, the complaint may be filed with the office within one year after the fraud, concealment, or misrepresentation was discovered.

Subd. 3.Form of complaint.

The complaint must be in writing, submitted under oath, and detail the factual basis for the claim that a violation of law has occurred. The office may prescribe the form of a complaint.

Subd. 4.Proof of claim.

The burden of proving the allegations in the complaint is on the complainant. The standard of proof of a violation of chapter 211A or 211B is a preponderance of the evidence.

Subd. 5.Filing fee; waiver; refund.

(a) The complaint must be accompanied by a filing fee of $50, unless filed by a filing officer under section 211A.05, subdivision 2.

(b) The office may waive the payment of the filing fee, if the individual seeking a waiver of the fee files with the office an affidavit stating that the individual is financially unable to pay the fee.

Subd. 6.Service on respondent.

Upon receipt of the filed complaint, the office must immediately notify the respondent and provide the respondent with a copy of the complaint by the most expeditious means available.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 14 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2006–2026 · leading case: Riley v. Jankowski, 713 N.W.2d 379 (Minn. Ct. App. 2006).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Riley v. Jankowski, 713 N.W.2d 379 (Minn. Ct. App. 2006). · cites it 20× “37 (2004) (a) violates the separation-of-powers doctrine, (b) violates relators’ constitutional right to trial by jury, and (c) unconstitutionally intrudes on relators’ First Amendment rights; (2) respondent Steven Riley lacked standing to file a complaint under Minn.Stat. §…”

Abrahamson v. St. Louis Cnty. Sch. Dist., 819 N.W.2d 129 (Minn. 2012). · cites it 6× “See Minn.Stat. § 211B.32, subd. 1 (2010) (requiring a complaint alleging a violation of chapter 211A or 211B to filed with the OAH).”

281 Care Comm. v. Ross Arneson, 766 F.3d 774 (8th Cir. 2014). · cites it 3× “Minn. Stat. § 211B.32, subd. 1. One possible resolution by the ALJ panel is to refer the complaint to the appropriate county attorney without rendering its own opinion on the matter, or in addition to its own resolution.”

Minnesota Voters All. v. Mansky, 138 S. Ct. 1876 (2018). “Minn. Stat. §§ 211B.32, 211B.35(2) (2014).”

Linert v. MacDonald, 901 N.W.2d 664 (Minn. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 4× “Minn. Stat. § 211B.32, subd. 1(a) (2016).”

Minnesota RFL Caucus v. Mike Freeman, 33 F.4th 985 (8th Cir. 2022). · cites it 2× “See Minn. Stat. § 211B.32, subd. 1(a) (“[A] complaint alleging a violation of chapter .”

Barry v. St. Anthony-New Brighton Indep. Sch. Dist. 282, 781 N.W.2d 898 (Minn. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 6× “Minn.Stat. § 211B.32, subd. 1 (2008). “The complaint must .”

Lewison v. Hutchinson, 929 N.W.2d 444 (Minn. Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 4× “Does substantial evidence support the determination that Hutchinson violated Minn.”

Minnesota Citizens Concerned for Life, Inc. v. Swanson, 741 F. Supp. 2d 1115 (D. Minnesota 2010). · cites it 2× “Minn. Stat. § 211B.32. Chapter 21 IB was also amended after Citizens United .”

Fine v. Bernstein, 726 N.W.2d 137 (Minn. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 211B.32, subd. 4 (2004). To prove that Bernstein violated Minn.”

Abrahamson v. St. Louis Cnty. Sch. Dist., 802 N.W.2d 393 (Minn. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× “promote or defeat a ballot question, that is false, and that the person knows is false or communicates to others with reckless disregard of whether it is false.” Minn.Stat. § 211B.06, subd. 1.”

Repub. Party of Minnesota v. Nathan Miller, Relators, Attorney Gen. Keith Ellison, ... (Minn. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 6× “Minn. Stat. § 211B.32, subd. 1(a) (2022).”

Show all 14 citing cases →

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.