Skip to main content Skip to office menu Skip to footer
Capital IconMinnesota Legislature

Office of the Revisor of Statutes


Rule 5.Appearance by Out-of-State Lawyers

Lawyers duly admitted to practice in the trial courts of any other jurisdiction may appear in any of the courts of this state provided (a) the pleadings are also signed by a lawyer duly admitted to practice in the State of Minnesota, and (b) such lawyer admitted in Minnesota is also present before the court, in chambers or in the courtroom or participates by telephone in any hearing conducted by telephone. In a subsequent appearance in the same action the out-of-state lawyer may, in the discretion of the court, conduct the proceedings without the presence of Minnesota counsel. The out-of-state lawyer is subject to all rules that apply to lawyers admitted in Minnesota, including rules related to e-filing.

Any lawyer appearing pursuant to this rule is subject to the disciplinary rules and regulations governing Minnesota lawyers and by applying to appear or appearing in any action is subject to the jurisdiction of the Minnesota courts.

(Amended effective July 1, 2015.)

Task Force Comment - 1991 Adoption

This rule is derived from 3rd Dist. R. 1.

This rule is intended to supplement Minnesota Statutes 1990, section 481.02, and would supersede the statute to the extent the rule may be inconsistent with it. This rule recognizes and preserves the power and responsibility of the court to determine the proper role to be played by lawyers not admitted to practice in Minnesota.

Advisory Committee Comment - 2015 Amendments

The amendments to Rule 5 are not substantive in nature or intended effect. They make explicit what the courts have recognized as within their inherent power to regulate the practice of law before the courts. The court's jurisdiction over the person of lawyers applying to appear or appearing in the Minnesota courts is not open to serious question, at least as to disciplinary matters relating to that application or appearance. This rule makes clear the court's jurisdiction over a pro hac vice applicant, and similarly makes it clear that e-filing of documents with the Minnesota courts would have this consequence. The application for a subpoena in an action pending outside Minnesota does not create an appearance under R. Civ. P. 45 as proposed by the civil rules advisory committee, but nonetheless subjects the applicant to the court's jurisdiction and disciplinary authority. The subpoena and procedures to enforce it are subject to Minnesota procedural rules and rules governing the conduct of lawyers.