Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 325E.395 (2026)

Facsimile Transmission Of Unsolicited Advertising Materials

✓ current as of May 2026

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

Subdivision 1.Telephone number and address required; notice.

(a) A person conducting business in this state may not make or cause to be made a facsimile transmission of documents consisting of unsolicited advertising material for the lease, sale, rental, gift offer, or other disposition of property or services unless the person establishes a toll-free telephone number that a recipient of the unsolicited documents may call to notify the sender not to transmit to the recipient unsolicited documents.

(b) Unsolicited facsimile transmissions subject to this section must include a statement, in at least 9-point type, informing the recipient of the toll-free telephone number the recipient may call, and an address the recipient may write to, to notify the sender not to transmit to the recipient unsolicited documents to the facsimile number specified by the recipient.

(c) Upon receiving a request not to transmit unsolicited documents, no person or entity conducting business in this state may make or cause to be made any unsolicited facsimile transmissions of documents to the person making the request.

Subd. 2.Exception.

This section does not apply to the transmission of documents by a telecommunications service provider to the extent that the telecommunications service provider merely provides transmission facilities.

Subd. 3.Remedies and penalties.

A person who is found to have violated this section is subject to the penalties and remedies, including a private right of action, as provided in section 8.31.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 3 cases, 2002–2002 · leading case: Minnesota Ex Rel. Hatch v. Sunbelt Comm. & Mkt., 282 F. Supp. 2d 976 (D. Minnesota 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Minnesota Ex Rel. Hatch v. Sunbelt Comm. & Mkt., 282 F. Supp. 2d 976 (D. Minnesota 2002). · cites it 4× “See Minn.Stat. § 325E.395 (2000). Citing then-Justice Rehnquist's concurring opinion in Bolger , Defendants argue that this would allow recipients to have their names removed from the list after one exposure to an unsolicited mailing.”

Missouri Ex Rel. Nixon v. Am. Blast Fax, Inc., 196 F. Supp. 2d 920 (E.D. Mo. 2002). “§ 47-18-2501(a) (same); Minn.Stat. § 325E.395(a)-(b) (same, but also must include address where recipient can write); Colo.”

Minnesota v. Sunbelt Commc'ns & Mktg., 282 F. Supp. 2d 976 (D. Minnesota 2002). · cites it 4× “See Minn.Stat. § 325E.395 (2000). Citing then-justice Rehnquist’s concurring opinion in Bolger , Defendants argue that this would allow recipients to have their names removed from the list after one exposure to an unsolicited mailing.”

— Minn. Stat. § 325E.395(a) — 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.