Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 271.08 (2026)

Findings Of Fact; Decision, Entry Of Judgment

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Subdivision 1.Written order.

The Tax Court, except in Small Claims Division, shall determine every appeal by written order containing findings of fact and the decision of the Tax Court. A memorandum of the grounds of the decision shall be appended. Notice of the entry of the order and of the substance of the decision shall be mailed to all parties. A motion for rehearing, which includes a motion for amended findings of fact, conclusions of law, or a new trial, must be served by the moving party within 30 days after mailing of the notice by the court as specified in this subdivision, and the motion must be heard within 30 days thereafter, unless the time for hearing is extended by the court within the 30-day period for good cause shown.

Subd. 2.Entry of judgment.

Upon the filing of the order of the Tax Court, described in subdivision 1, with the court administrator of the Tax Court, judgment shall be entered thereon in the same manner as in the case of an order of the district court.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1949–2019 · leading case: Beuning Fam. LP v. Cnty. of Stearns, 817 N.W.2d 122 (Minn. 2012).
Beuning Fam. LP v. Cnty. of Stearns, 817 N.W.2d 122 (Minn. 2012). · cites it 7× “” Minnesota Statutes § 271.08, subd. 2 (2010), provides: “Upon the filing of the order of the tax court, described in subdivision 1, with the court administrator of the tax court, judgment shall be entered thereon in the same manner as in the case of an order of the district…”
Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y of the United States v. Cnty. of Ramsey, 530 N.W.2d 544 (Minn. 1995). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 271.08, subd. 1 (1992). The trial in this case covered a two-week period occupying over 2,100 pages of trial transcript, in which 17 witnesses testified and 130 exhibits were admitted.”
Krech v. Comm'r of Revenue, 557 N.W.2d 335 (Minn. 1997). · cites it 6× “The argument relies initially on the language of Minn. Stat. § 271.08 , subd. 1 which governs the giving of notice of tax court decisions, and provides: Written order.”
Wulff v. Tax Court of Appeals, 288 N.W.2d 221 (Minn. 1979). · cites it 2× “1, uses courtrooms of the district court, determines appeals, makes findings of fact, and issues written orders, § 271.08, subd. 1. In addition, § 271.08, subd.”
Skelly Oil Co. v. Comm'r of Taxation, 131 N.W.2d 632 (Minn. 1964). · cites it 2× “Section 271.08 provides that the board shall determine every appeal by written order containing findings of fact and the board’s decision, and that a memorandum of the grounds of the decision shall be appended.”
Oliver Iron Mining Co. v. Comm'r of Taxation, 76 N.W.2d 107 (Minn. 1956). · cites it 2× “Section 271.08 provides that the board shall determine every appeal by written order containing findings of fact and the decision of the board therein, and that a memorandum of the grounds of the decision shall be appended.”
Stronge & Lightner Co. v. Comm'r of Taxation, 36 N.W.2d 800 (Minn. 1949). · cites it 2× “Section 271.08 requires the board to make findings of fact.”
Comm'r of Revenue, Relator v. Dahmes Stainless, Inc., 884 N.W.2d 648 (Minn. 2016). · cites it 2× “The tax court further reasoned that “the statutory scheme,” Minn. Stat. § 271.08 (2014), “clearly calls for two distinct, actions: the filing of a written order, followed by the entry of judgment with respect to that.”
Metro. Sheet Metal Journeyman & Apprentice Training Trust Fund v. Cnty. of Ramsey, 832 N.W.2d 844 (Minn. 2013). · cites it 2× “Quoting Minn.Stat. § 271.08, subd. 1 (2012), which requires the tax court to “determine every appeal,” we concluded that a final order must “determine” a relator’s appeal.”
Guardian Energy, LLC v. Cnty. of Waseca, 927 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. 2019). · cites it 2× “01 and Minn. Stat. § 271.08 , subd. 1 (2018). See also Minn.”
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.