Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 595. WITNESSES
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 595.023 (2026)

Disclosure Prohibited

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

Except as provided in section 595.024, no person who is or has been directly engaged in the gathering, procuring, compiling, editing, or publishing of information for the purpose of transmission, dissemination or publication to the public shall be required by any court, grand jury, agency, department or branch of the state, or any of its political subdivisions or other public body, or by either house of the legislature or any committee, officer, member, or employee thereof, to disclose in any proceeding the person or means from or through which information was obtained, or to disclose any unpublished information procured by the person in the course of work or any of the person's notes, memoranda, recording tapes, film or other reportorial data whether or not it would tend to identify the person or means through which the information was obtained.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1990–2025 · leading case: Weinberger v. Maplewood Review, 668 N.W.2d 667 (Minn. 2003).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Weinberger v. Maplewood Review, 668 N.W.2d 667 (Minn. 2003). · cites it 16× “" Minn.Stat. § 595.023. While recognizing and designing a substantial privilege for the news media, the legislature created two exceptions to that privilege that require disclosure of unnamed sources under certain limited circumstances.”
State v. Turner, 550 N.W.2d 622 (Minn. 1996). · cites it 9× “” Minn.Stat. § 595.023 (1994) (emphasis added).”
State v. Knutson, 523 N.W.2d 909 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 7× “022 (1992) (referring broadly to “news media” and “news gatherer”) and Minn.Stat. § 595.023 (1992) (referring to persons “directly engaged in the gathering, procuring, compiling, editing or publishing of information”) suggests that the legislature implicitly extended standing to…”
Glenn R. Funk v. Scripps Media, Inc., 570 S.W.3d 205 (Tenn. 2019). “509 ; see also Minn. Stat. Ann. § 595.023 (West, through the end of the 2018 Reg.”
Heaslip v. Freeman, 511 N.W.2d 21 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 595.023 (1992) (emphasis added).”
New York Times Co. v. Superior Court, 796 P.2d 811 (Cal. 1990). · cites it 2× “§ 9-112; Minn. Stat. § 595.023 ; N.D. Cent. Code § 31-01-06.”
Weinberger v. Maplewood Review, 648 N.W.2d 249 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 4× “2 * * * Notwithstanding the provision of subdivision 1, the identity of the source of information shall not be ordered disclosed unless the following conditions are met: (a) that there is probable cause to believe that the source has information clearly relevant to the issue of…”
Bauer v. Gannett Co., Inc.(KARE 11), 557 N.W.2d 608 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 4× “The Act provides general protection to reporters from compelled disclosure of their sources: “No [reporter] shall be required by any court * * * to disclose in any proceeding the person or means from or through which information was obtained * * * Minn.Stat. § 595.023. But an…”
Range Dev. Co. of Chisholm v. Star Tribune, Paul McEnroe, 885 N.W.2d 500 (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 2× “See Minn.Stat. § 595.023 (2014) (stating that general rule).”
State v. Knutson, 539 N.W.2d 254 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 2× “Knutson I does state that "Section 595.023 only prohibits compelled direct or indirect disclosure of sources” and that "the statute does not apply where, as here, the unpublished information would not identify a source.”
Energy Transfer LP (formerly known as Energy Transfer Equity, L.P.) v. Greenpeace Int'l ..., 7 N.W.3d 153 (Minn. Ct. App. 2024). · cites it 10× “Specifically, Minn. Stat. § 595.023 provides: Except as provided in section 595.”
Energy Transfer LP (formerly known as Energy Transfer Equity, L.P.), et al., Appellants, vs. Greenpeace Int'l ... (Minn. 2025). · cites it 16× “Minn. Stat. § 595.023 . There are two exceptions to the general prohibition on compelled disclosure under the MFFIA: the first pertains to information that is clearly relevant to a crime, and the second pertains to information that will lead to relevant evidence regarding actual…”
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.