Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 606.01 (2026)

Certiorari, Within What Time Writ Issued

✓ current as of May 2026

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

No writ of certiorari shall be issued, to correct any proceeding, unless such writ shall be issued within 60 days after the party applying for such writ shall have received due notice of the proceeding sought to be reviewed thereby. The party shall apply to the court of appeals for the writ.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 76 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1950–2026 · leading case: Mark R. Zweber v. Credit River Twp., 882 N.W.2d 605 (Minn. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Mark R. Zweber v. Credit River Twp., 882 N.W.2d 605 (Minn. 2016). · cites it 24× “Zweber II, 2015 WL 1128985 , at *4-5; see also Minn. Stat. § 606.01 (2014) (“The party shall apply to the Court of Appeals for the writ.”

Dokmo v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 11, 459 N.W.2d 671 (Minn. 1990). · cites it 12× “1977); Minn.Stat. § 606.01 (1988). A court acts in an appellate capacity by reviewing the school board's record, whatever that record might be, regardless of whether a hearing was provided below.”

Tischer v. Hous. & Redevelopment Auth. of Cambridge, 693 N.W.2d 426 (Minn. 2005). · cites it 8× “Minn.Stat. § 606.01 (2004). [2] This general rule is stated as being applied to executive bodies that do not have statewide jurisdiction because executive bodies with statewide jurisdiction are subject to the Administrative Procedure Act, which specifies the procedure for…”

Cnty. of Washington v. City of Oak Park Heights, 818 N.W.2d 533 (Minn. 2012). · cites it 10× “” The City argued that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over the action on the ground that the City Council’s decision to deny the County’s request for reimbursement was quasi-judicial, and that review of its decision was therefore limited to a writ of…”

Heideman v. Metro. Airports Comm'n, 555 N.W.2d 322 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 22× “Minn. Stat. § 606.01 . In 1996, the legislature amended section 606.”

Bahr v. City of Litchfield, 420 N.W.2d 604 (Minn. 1988). · cites it 14× “Minn.Stat. § 606.01 (1986). In reversing the trial court, the court of appeals held that the statutory time period does not begin to run until the party adversely affected is personally served with written notice of the order or other proceeding to be reviewed.”

Dietz v. Dodge Cnty., 487 N.W.2d 237 (Minn. 1992). · cites it 4× “Minn. Stat. § 606.01 (1990). Because it mandates nonintrusive and expedient judicial review, certiorari is compatible with the maintenance of fundamental separation of power principles, [2] and thus is a particularly appropriate method of limiting and coordinating judicial…”

Williams v. Smith, 820 N.W.2d 807 (Minn. 2012). · cites it 4× “As with any state agency, judicial review of the University’s administrative and quasi-judicial decisions is both limited and deferential, and under separation of powers principles, the exclusive method of review is by certiorari pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 606.01 (2010). 2 See…”

Senior v. City of Edina, 547 N.W.2d 411 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 12× “Was Senior’s petition for writ of certio-rari timely under Minn.Stat. § 606.01 (1994)? 2. Was the city’s decision to terminate Senior’s employment arbitrary and capricious? ANALYSIS 1.”

Rochester City Lines, Co. v. City of Rochester, First Transit, Inc., 868 N.W.2d 655 (Minn. 2015). · cites it 4× “See Minn. Stat. § 606.01 (2014). To the extent that RCL challenges the City’s quasi-judicial decisions in the current action, those challenges were never properly before the district court because such decisions are reviewable only by writ of certiorari in the court of appeals.”

Twp. of Honner v. Redwood Cnty., 518 N.W.2d 639 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994). · cites it 6× “120 and Minn.Stat. § 606.01.” In re Haymes, 444 N.”

Bahr v. City of Litchfield, 404 N.W.2d 381 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 20× “Are appellants entitled to summary judgment on their claims against respondents? ANALYSIS I Minnesota's Police Civil Service Commission Act provides a six-year statute of limitations for challenging a police commission's certification of any person to fill a vacancy. Minn.Stat.”

Show all 76 citing cases →

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.