Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 47. FINANCIAL CORPORATIONS
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 47.41 (2026)

Negotiable Instruments, Facsimile Signatures, Disbursement Of Public Funds

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

Any public officer or other person who is authorized singly or in conjunction with another or others, to sign checks, drafts, warrants, warrant-checks, vouchers or other orders on public funds on deposit in a depository bank may authorize the bank to honor any such instrument bearing a facsimile of that person's signature and to charge the same to the account upon which drawn, as fully as though it bore a manually written signature. Instruments so honored shall be wholly operative and binding in favor of the bank although such facsimile signature shall have been affixed without authority of such officer or other person. Any one or more or all of the signatures upon any such instrument may be facsimile as herein provided. As here used "public funds" means funds of the state or of any county, city, town, school district, any political subdivision of the state, or of any commission, board, department or agency of any thereof.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1978–2003 · leading case: State v. Gutierrez, 667 N.W.2d 426 (Minn. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State v. Gutierrez, 667 N.W.2d 426 (Minn. 2003). · cites it 2× “…v. State, 608 N.W.2d 881, 885 (Minn.2000); 9 Henry McCarr & Jack Nordby, Minnesota Practice—Crim. Law and Proc. § 47.41 (3d ed.2001).”
Miller v. Federated Mut. Ins. Co., 264 N.W.2d 631 (Minn. 1978). “In an effort to avoid this conclusion, appellant cites cases holding that volunteer workers are not “employees” within the purview of worker’s compensation statutes.”
Minn. Stat. § 47.41(a): 1 case
Miller v. Federated Mut. Ins. Co., 264 N.W.2d 631 (Minn. 1978). “In an effort to avoid this conclusion, appellant cites cases holding that volunteer workers are not “employees” within the purview of worker’s compensation statutes.”
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.