Unless specifically required by court rule, a pleading, motion, affidavit, or other document filed with a court of the Minnesota judicial branch, or presented to a judge or judicial officer in support of a request for a court order, warrant, or other relief, is not required to be notarized. Signing a document filed with the court or presented to a judge or judicial officer constitutes "verification upon oath or affirmation" as defined in section 358.52, without administration of an oath under section 358.07, provided that the signature, as defined by court rules, is affixed immediately below a declaration using substantially the following language: "I declare under penalty of perjury that everything I have stated in this document is true and correct." In addition to the signature, the date of signing and the county and state where the document was signed shall be noted on the document. A person who signs knowing that the document is false in any material respect is guilty of perjury under section 609.48, even if the date, county, and state of signing are omitted from the document.
Notes of Decisions
Metro. Transp. Network, Inc. v. Collaborative Student Transp. of Minnesota, ..., 6 N.W.3d 771 (Minn. Ct. App. 2024).
· cites it 2× “Alternatively, an affidavit is “‘a document that has been signed under penalty of perjury pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 358.116, provided that the signature is affixed immediately below a declaration’ that says something like, ‘I declare under penalty of perjury that…”
State of Minnesota v. John Joseph Plevell, 889 N.W.2d 584 (Minn. Ct. App. 2017).
· cites it 2× “[[Image here]] (5) Written statements under oath or signed under penalty of perjury pursuant to Minnesota Statutes, section 358.116, of witnesses who for reasons of ill health, or for other valid reasons, are unable to testify in person if the witnesses, or otherwise admissible…”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Michael Lee Vick, Appellant (Minn. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 8× “” The state argued that the foundational requirements were met because the updated affidavit included a statement indicating that the affiant signed it under penalty of perjury in compliance with Minn. Stat. § 358.116 (2024). The district court agreed that some of the statements…”
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.