MINNESOTA COURT RULES

RECORD ACCESS

Rule 7.Procedure for Requesting Record Access or Case Record Correction.

Subdivision 1.To Whom Request is Made.

A request to inspect or obtain copies of records that are accessible to the public shall be made to the custodian and may be made orally or in writing. The custodian may insist on a written request only if the complexity of the request or the volume of records requested would jeopardize the efficiency and accuracy of the response to an oral request. All requests must include sufficient information to reasonably identify the data being sought, but the requesting person shall not be required to have detailed knowledge of the agency's filing system or procedures, nor shall the requesting person be required to disclose the purpose of the request.

Subd. 2.Response.

The custodian shall respond to the request as promptly as practical.

Subd. 3.Delay or Denial; Explanation.

If a request cannot be granted promptly, or at all, an explanation shall be given to the requesting person as soon as possible. The requesting person has the right to at least the following information: the nature of any problem preventing access, and the specific statute, federal law, or court or administrative rule that is the basis of the denial. The explanation shall be in writing if desired by the requesting person. Appeals are governed by Rule 9 of these rules.

Subd. 4.Referral in Certain Cases.

If the custodian is uncertain of the status of a record, the custodian may ask for a status determination from the state court administrator. The state court administrator shall promptly make a determination and forward it either orally or in writing to the custodian.

Subd. 5.Correction of Case Records.

An individual who believes that a case record contains clerical errors may submit a written request for correction to the court administrator of the court that maintains the record, with a copy served on all parties to the case. Such request shall be no longer than two pages in length. The court administrator shall promptly do one of the following: (a) correct a clerical error for which no court order is required; (b) forward the request to the court to be considered informally; or (c) forward the request to the party or participant who submitted the record containing the alleged clerical error who in turn may seek appropriate relief from the court. Upon forwarding under clause (b), the court may either correct the error on its own initiative or direct that the request will only be considered pursuant to a motion requesting correction. The court's directive may also establish appropriate notice requirements for a motion. The request for correction authorized in this subdivision need not be exhausted before other relief is requested.

(Amended effective July 1, 2005.)

Advisory Committee Comment - 2005

The 2005 addition in Rule 7, subd. 3, of a cross reference to appeals under Rule 9 is added as a convenience to counterbalance the growing complexity of these rules. The 2005 deletion of the phrase "by phone or by mail" in Rule 7, subd. 4, recognizes that a determination is often issued in electronic format, such as e-mail or facsimile transmission.

The 2005 addition of subdivision 5 regarding correction of case records is based in part on MINN. GEN. R. PRAC. 115.11 (motions to reconsider). In the context of Internet publication of court records, a streamlined process is particularly appropriate for clerical-type errors, and should allow for prompt resolution of oversights and omissions. For example, to the extent that the register of actions, court calendar, or index in a court's case management system incorrectly incorporates provisions of a court order, judgment, or pleading, such data entry inaccuracies are typically corrected without a court order by court administration staff promptly upon learning of the inaccuracy.

A party is not required to utilize the procedure set forth in subdivision 5 before making a formal motion for correction of a case record in the first instance. Alleged inaccuracies in orders and judgments themselves must be brought to the attention of the court in accordance with procedures established for that purpose. Clerical errors in judgments and orders typically can be addressed by motion. See, e.g., MINN. GEN. R. PRAC. 375 (expedited child support process: clerical mistakes, typographical errors, and errors in mathematical calculations in orders ... arising from oversight or omission may be corrected by the child support magistrate at any time upon the magistrate's own initiative or upon motion of any party after notice to all parties); MINN. R. CIV. P. 60.01 (civil cases: clerical mistakes in judgments, orders, or other parts of the record and errors therein arising from oversight or omission may be corrected by the court at any time on its own initiative or on the motion of any party after such notice, if any, the court orders); MINN. R. CRIM. P. 27.03, subds. 8, 9 (criminal cases: clerical mistakes in judgments, orders, or other parts of the record or errors in the record arising from oversight or omission may be corrected by the court at any time and after such notice, if any, as the court orders; the court may at any time correct a sentence not authorized by law); MINN. R. JUV. PROT. P. 46.01 (juvenile protection cases: clerical mistakes in judgments, orders, or other parts of the record and errors arising from oversight or omission may be corrected by the court at any time upon its own initiative or upon motion of any party and after such notice, if any, as the court orders; during the pendency of an appeal, such mistakes can be corrected with leave of the appellate court); MINN. R. CIV. APP. P. 110.05 (differences as to whether the transcript or other parts of the record on appeal truly disclose what occurred in the trial court are to be submitted to and determined by the trial court; material omissions or misstatements may be resolved by the trial court, stipulation of the parties, or by the appellate court on motion by a party or on its own initiative).

Alleged inaccuracies in the records submitted by the parties and other participants in the litigation must also be brought to the attention of the court through existing procedures for introducing and challenging evidence. These procedures typically have deadlines associated with the progress of the case and failure to act in a timely fashion may preclude relief.