Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 480A. COURT OF APPEALS
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 480A.03 (2026)

Chief Judge

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

Subdivision 1.Election; term; removal.

The governor shall designate one of the judges of the court of appeals to be chief judge for a term of three years. Vacancies in the office of chief judge shall be filled for the remainder of the unexpired term.

The chief judge may be reappointed. If the chief judge ceases to be a judge of the court of appeals, the office of chief judge also becomes vacant.

Subd. 2.Administrative authority.

The chief judge, subject to the authority of the chief justice, shall exercise general administrative authority over the court. The chief judge shall make assignments of judges to serve on the panels of the court and shall designate the places at which the panels will hear arguments.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases, 1987–2010 · leading case: State Ex Rel. Spannaus v. Nw. Airlines, Inc., 413 N.W.2d 514 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State Ex Rel. Spannaus v. Nw. Airlines, Inc., 413 N.W.2d 514 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “See Minn.Stat. § 480A.03, subd. 2 (1986) (administrative authority vested in Chief Judge, subject to the authority of the Chief Justice of the Minnesota Supreme Court).”
Skyline Vill. Park Ass'n v. Skyline Vill. L.P., 786 N.W.2d 304 (Minn. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “1993); Minn.Stat. § 480A.03, subd. 3 (2008) (“Unpublished *310 opinions of the court of appeals are not precedential.”
Thompson ex rel. Buchanon v. Bd. of Special Sch. Dist. No. 1, 936 F. Supp. 644 (D. Minnesota 1996). “§ 480A.03 it is not controlling. H.M. offers no legal authority to support its conclusion and the Court finds this decision unpersuasive.”
Thompson v. Bd. of Special Sch. Dist. No. 1, 936 F. Supp. 644 (D. Minnesota 1996). “§ 480A.03 it is not controlling. H.M. offers no legal authority to support its conclusion and the Court finds this decision unpersuasive.”
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.