Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 465.76 (2026)

May Pay For Officer Or Employee's Criminal Defense

✓ current as of May 2026

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

Subdivision 1.If lawfully doing duty.

If reimbursement is requested by the officer or employee, the governing body of a home rule charter or statutory city, a town or a county may, after consultation with its legal counsel, reimburse the city, town or county officer or employee for any costs and reasonable attorney's fees incurred by the person to defend charges of a criminal nature brought against the person that arose out of the reasonable and lawful performance of duties for the city, town or county.

Subd. 2.When judge must approve.

If less than a quorum of the governing body is disinterested, the reimbursement under subdivision 1 shall be approved by a judge of the district court.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1987–1996 · leading case: Kroschel v. City of Afton, 512 N.W.2d 351 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Kroschel v. City of Afton, 512 N.W.2d 351 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 19× “Appellants also assert that respondent LMCIT, a self-insuring pool operated for the benefit of Minnesota municipalities, owes them a defense and reimbursement under the covenant issued to the city by LMCIT.”

Bush v. City of Lakefield, 399 N.W.2d 169 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 6× “Appellant’s complaint alleged various forms of breach of contract, including breach of a contract implied-in-law based on Minn.Stat. § 465.76, which authorizes reimbursement of a city employee’s legal fees incurred in the successful defense of a criminal action.”

Kroschel v. City of Afton, 524 N.W.2d 719 (Minn. 1994). · cites it 2× “The court of appeals reasoned the Trust’s duty to defend the officials under the covenant paralleled Afton’s authority to defend the officials under Minn. Stat. § 465.76 (1992). Because we conclude that the Trust has no duty to defend the officials, we reverse.”

Op. Atty. Gen. 442a-1 (Minn. Att'y Gen. 1996). · cites it 10× “Minn. Stat. §§ 465.76 , 466.07, 471.44 (1994).”

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.