Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 611. RIGHTS OF ACCUSED
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 611.363 (2026)

Compensation Panel

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

Subdivision 1.Appointment.

Within 30 business days after the claim is filed with the supreme court, the chief justice of the supreme court shall appoint a compensation panel of three attorneys or judges who are responsible for determining the amount of damages to be awarded. Members of the panel must have experience in legal issues involving the settlement of tort claims and the determination of damages.

Subd. 2.Compensation of panel members.

(a) Members of the panel are entitled to the compensation authorized for members of boards under section 15.0575, subdivision 3.

(b) Consistent with sections 611.362 to 611.368, the panel may establish procedures, rules, and forms for considering claims and awarding damages.

Subd. 3.Payment of expenses.

The state court administrator shall forward documentation of expenses and administrative costs of the panel to the commissioner of management and budget for payment of those amounts from appropriations available for this purpose.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2016–2017 · leading case: Danna Rochelle Back v. State of Minnesota, 883 N.W.2d 614 (Minn. Ct. App. 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Danna Rochelle Back v. State of Minnesota, 883 N.W.2d 614 (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 3× “Minn. Stat. § 611.363 , subd. 1. Finally, the amount of the award is submitted to the Minnesota Legislature “for consideration during the next session of the legislature.”
Back v. State, 902 N.W.2d 23 (Minn. 2017). · cites it 2× “See Minn. Stat. §§ 611.363 -.364. The final award is forwarded to the Commissioner of Management and Budget, who must then “submit the amount of the award to the [Legislature for consideration .”
Nelson v. State, 896 N.W.2d 879 (Minn. Ct. App. 2017). · cites it 2× “Minn. Stat. § 611.363 , subd. 1; Back, 883 N.”
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.