Minnesota Statutes
Minn. Stat. § 554.02 (2026)
[Repealed]
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
MS 2022 [Repealed, 2024 c 123 art 18 s 16]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 30
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1997–2026 · leading case: Leiendecker v. Asian Women United of Minnesota, 895 N.W.2d 623 (Minn. 2017).
Leiendecker v. Asian Women United of Minnesota, 895 N.W.2d 623 (Minn. 2017). “After we clarified the law’s procedure, the district court ruled that the section of the law that governs motions “to dispose of a judicial claim,” Minn. Stat. § 554.02 , subdivision 1, violated the Leien-deckers’ right to a jury trial by requiring the trial judge to find facts.”
Leiendecker v. Asian Women United of Minnesota, 848 N.W.2d 224 (Minn. 2014). “” Minn.Stat. § 554.02, subd. 1. The district court dismissed most of the Leiendeckers’ claims, but denied AWUM’s anti-SLAPP motion with respect to one: a claim for malicious prosecution.”
Middle-Snake-Tamarac Rivers Watershed Dist. v. Stengrim, 784 N.W.2d 834 (Minn. 2010). “56 and Minn.Stat. § 554.02” (the anti-SLAPP motion), and the Watershed District filed a motion for partial summary judgment.”
Unity Healthcare, Inc. v. Cnty. of Hennepin, 308 F.R.D. 537 (D. Minnesota 2015). “After a motion is filed seeking immunity under the anti-SLAPP law, the court must determine whether the party seeking dismissal has made a threshold showing that the underlying “claim materially relates to an act of the moving party that involves public participation.”
Nexus v. Swift, 785 N.W.2d 771 (Minn. Ct. App. 2010). “A party may move “to dispose of a judicial claim on the grounds that the claim materially relates to an act of the moving party that involves public participation,” Minn.Stat. § 554.02, subd. 1, which is defined as “speech or lawful conduct that is genuinely aimed in whole or in…”
Leiendecker v. Asian Women United of Minnesota, 834 N.W.2d 741 (Minn. Ct. App. 2013). “” Minn.Stat. § 554.02, subd. 1. Public participation means “speech or lawful conduct that is genuinely aimed in whole or in part at procuring favorable government action.”
Marchant Inv. & Mgmt. Co. v. St. Anthony West Neighborhood Org., Inc., 694 N.W.2d 92 (Minn. Ct. App. 2005). “03 and Minn.Stat. § 554.02, subd. 2(3), for judgment on the pleadings on all claims.”
Freeman v. Swift, 776 N.W.2d 485 (Minn. Ct. App. 2009). “She moved to dismiss the lawsuit under Minn.Stat. § 554.02, subd. 2(3) (2008). The district court denied the motion to dismiss, holding that the statements were not genuinely aimed at procuring favorable government action and therefore are not entitled to immunity under the…”
Competitive Enter. Inst. & Rand Simberg v. Michael E. Mann, Nat'l Review, Inc. v. Michael E. Mann, 150 A.3d 1213 (D.C. 2016). “e to use constitutional avoidance canon to interpret statute to avoid constitutional defect where statutory language "unambiguously require[s] the responding party to produce evidence and the district court to make a finding on whether 'the responding party has produced clear…”
Mobile Diagnostic Imaging, Inc. v. Racheal L. Hooten f/k/a Racheal L. Jones, 889 N.W.2d 27 (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). “Does Minn. Stat. § 554.02 violate the non-moving party’s constitutional right to a jury tidal by requiring the district court to find facts before trial to determine whether the moving party is entitled to immunity? II.”
Krystkowiak v. W.O. Brisben Companies, Inc., 90 P.3d 859 (Colo. 2004). “231, § 59H (West 2003); Minn.Stat. Ann. § 554.02 (West 2003); N.Y.”
Davis v. Cox, 351 P.3d 862 (Wash. 2015). “” Compare Minn. Stat. § 554.02 , subd. 2(3), and RCW 4.”
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.