Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 586.11 (2026)

Jurisdiction Of District And Appellate Courts

✓ current as of May 2026

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

The district court has exclusive original jurisdiction in all cases of mandamus, except where the writ is to be directed to a district court or a judge thereof in the judge's official capacity, in which case the court of appeals has exclusive original jurisdiction, or except where the writ is to be directed to the court of appeals or a judge thereof in the judge's official capacity. If the writ is to be directed to the court of appeals or a judge thereof in the judge's official capacity, the supreme court or a judge thereof has original jurisdiction. The Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure shall apply in all proceedings on the writ.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 12 cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1946–2024 · leading case: Winters v. Kiffmeyer, 650 N.W.2d 167 (Minn. 2002).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Winters v. Kiffmeyer, 650 N.W.2d 167 (Minn. 2002). · cites it 2× “11 (2000), the district court has exclusive original jurisdiction in cases of mandamus except when the writ is to be directed to a district court or the court of appeals or a judge of either the district court or the court of appeals. Because the writ was to be directed to the…”

Clark v. Ritchie, 787 N.W.2d 142 (Minn. 2010). · cites it 2× “See Minn.Stat. § 586.11 (2008); Minn. R. Civ.”

Payne v. Lee, 24 N.W.2d 259 (Minn. 1946). “1941, § 586.11 (Mason St. 1927, § 9782); Medlin v.”

State v. Hart, 723 N.W.2d 254 (Minn. 2006). · cites it 2× “The court of appeals had jurisdiction to entertain the state's petition pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 586.11 (2004) ("[Wjhere the writ is to be directed to a district court or a judge thereof in the judge's official capacity, * * * the Court of Appeals has exclusive original…”

Brandhorst v. Special Sch. Dist. No. 1, 466 N.W.2d 409 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 586.11 (1990). Although a petition for mandamus in an administrative controversy has been considered by this court, Northwoods Environmental Inst.”

Ramsey Cnty. v. Guardian D.F. ex rel. of K.D.F., 828 N.W.2d 138 (Minn. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “” Minn.Stat. § 586.11. Upon the filing of a petition, The writ of mandamus may be issued .”

Comm'r of Pub. Saf. v. Barlow, 352 N.W.2d 851 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 2× “The county court did not exceed its authority by ordering the record be expunged, nor did its order amount to improper service of mandamus upon the Commissioner contrary to statutory provisions on mandamus; Minn.Stat. § 586.11 (1982). DECISION The expunging of the record of…”

State v. Adams, 110 N.W.2d 153 (Minn. 1961). · cites it 2× “Section 586.11 gives the district court exclusive original jurisdiction in all cases of mandamus except where such writ is to be directed to a district court or a judge thereof in his official capacity.”

Rud v. Johnston (D. Minnesota 2024). · cites it 4× “Minn. Stat. § 586.11 provides that “[t]he district court has exclusive original jurisdiction in all cases of mandamus,” aside from exceptions that do not apply to this case.”

Hassing v. Zahalka, 60 N.W.2d 86 (Minn. 1953). · cites it 2× “Section 586.11 gives the district court exclusive original jurisdiction in all cases of mandamus except where such writ is to be directed to a district court or a judge thereof in his official capacity.”

Tokvan Ly v. Jodi Harpstead, Minnesota Comm'r of Human Servs., 7 N.W.3d 560 (2024). “See In re Polaris, Inc., 967 N.W.2d 397 , 405 (Minn.”

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.