Question 1

What can a Minnesota discovery motion memorandum actually contain?

Accepted Answer

Three things and nothing else. Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 115.05 provides that for motions involving discovery requests, the moving party's memorandum shall set forth only the particular discovery requests and the response or objection thereto which are the subject of the motion, and a concise recitation of why the response or objection is improper. Read the word only as a limit on you, not just a list. It means the requests actually in dispute rather than the whole set you served; the response or objection as it was served, not your summary of it; and a concise explanation of the defect rather than a narrative about how the case has gone. The practical effect is that the drafting job is selection. Decide which requests you are pressing, because each one has to appear with its response and its reason, and anything you cannot explain concisely is probably not worth including. Two caps sit around that. No memorandum of law on a dispositive or nondispositive motion shall exceed 35 pages, exclusive of the recital of facts required by Gen. R. Prac. 115.03(d)(3), except with permission of the court. And if a reply memorandum is filed, the cumulative total of the original and the reply shall not exceed 35 pages, again except with permission. Note what Minnesota does not have: there is no document called a separate statement and no statement of discovery issues, so do not look for a form. The requirement is inside the memorandum rule.

Question 2

Can I get a Minnesota discovery dispute decided without filing a motion?

Accepted Answer

Since 1 July 2026, often yes, and the rule invites you to try. Gen. R. Prac. 115.04(d) provides that the moving party is encouraged to consider whether the motion can be informally resolved through a remote technology conference with the judge or judicial officer. You invoke it by written notice to the court and to all opposing counsel and self-represented litigants, and you must also contact the appropriate court administrative or judicial staff to schedule the conference. The parties may, but are not required to, submit short letters, with or without a limited number of documents attached, and the rule is explicit about what is not allowed: no briefs, declarations or sworn affidavits are to be filed. The court may direct the manner of submission of the letters in its discretion. It will read the written submissions before the conference, hear arguments at the conference, and issue its decision at the conclusion of the conference or shortly after. Depending on the nature of the dispute it may or may not issue a written order, and it may also determine that the dispute must be presented by formal motion and hearing after all. Two trade-offs belong in the decision. The conferences held under the rule will not be recorded or transcribed, so there is no record of what was argued. And because the court may or may not issue a written order, you may come away with a resolution that is harder to enforce later than an order would be. Against that, the informal route avoids the 21-day, 14-day and 7-day service schedule in Gen. R. Prac. 115.04(a) to (c) and the 35-page memorandum apparatus entirely.

Question 3

Who has to start the conversation before a Minnesota motion, and what gets certified?

Accepted Answer

You do, and you certify twice over to two different audiences. Gen. R. Prac. 115.10 provides that no motion will be heard unless the parties have conferred in an attempt to resolve their differences prior to the hearing, that the moving party shall initiate the conference, and that the moving party shall certify to the court, before the time of the hearing, compliance with the rule or any reasons for not complying, including lack of availability or cooperation of opposing counsel. Three things in that are worth separating. The consequence is a refusal to hear the motion rather than a fee penalty, so this is not something to tidy up later. The duty to initiate is assigned to the movant by name, so waiting for the other side to reach out does not satisfy it. And where the conversation did not happen, the rule does not let you stay silent: the certificate must state the reasons, and it names lack of availability or cooperation of opposing counsel as the kind of reason that counts. Separately, Rule 37.01(b)(2) requires the motion itself to include a certification that the movant has in good faith conferred or attempted to confer with the person or party failing to make the discovery in an effort to secure the information or material without court action. That one goes inside the motion; the 115.10 certification goes to the court before the hearing. A Minnesota movant owes both. There is a money consequence too: Rule 37.01(d)(1) withholds the otherwise mandatory expense award where the court finds the motion was filed before the movant attempted in good faith to obtain the discovery without court action. Rule 115.10 was amended effective July 1, 2026, so older guidance may describe it differently.

Question 4

Is there a Minnesota deadline for bringing the motion?

Accepted Answer

No, and Minnesota abolished the one it used to have and explained why. The word days does not appear anywhere in the whole of Minn. R. Civ. P. 37. The Advisory Committee Comment printed with the 1996 amendment of Rule 33 records what happened: the existing provision requiring a party receiving objections to interrogatories to move within fifteen days to have the objections determined, and the waiver of a right to answers if such a motion was not made within the required time, had not worked well; there was no reason to require such prompt action, and much to commend more orderly consideration of the objections; and the absolute waiver of the old rule gives way to an explicit right to have the matter resolved by the court, and permits that to be done at any time. The comment goes on to say this lets the party receiving objections determine their validity, attempt to resolve any dispute, consider the eventual importance of the information, and possibly take the matter up with the court together with other matters. The operative rule reflects it. Rule 33.01(c) provides that the party submitting the interrogatories may move for an order under Rule 37.01 with respect to any objection to or other failure to answer an interrogatory, and that answers to interrogatories to which objection has been made shall be deferred until the objections are determined. So in Minnesota a pending objection pauses the answering obligation rather than starting a clock against you. What does bind is the hearing timetable in Gen. R. Prac. 115.04 and whatever your scheduling order says.

Question 5

Where does my Minnesota discovery completion date come from?

Accepted Answer

From a scheduling order the court has to enter, and the completion date is one of the two things that order must contain. Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 111.03(a) provides that no sooner than the due date of the last civil cover sheet under Rule 104, and no longer than 90 days after an action has been filed, the court shall enter its scheduling order, and that it may issue the order after a conference or without a conference or hearing if none is needed. Rule 111.03(b) then separates the mandatory from the optional. The order shall provide for alternative dispute resolution as required by Rule 114.04(c), and it shall establish a date for the completion of discovery. Everything else on the list is something the order may also establish, including deadlines for joining additional parties, deadlines for bringing nondispositive or dispositive motions, deadlines or specific dates for submitting particular issues to the court, a deadline for completing an independent physical, mental or blood examination under Minn. R. Civ. P. 35, a date for a formal discovery conference under Minn. R. Civ. P. 26.06 or a pretrial conference under Minn. R. Civ. P. 16, deadlines for pretrial submissions, and a trial date. So read your order for two different things: the discovery completion date, which will be there, and a motion deadline, which may or may not be. Rule 111.01 lists the case types excluded from the scheduling system altogether, including conciliation court actions and conciliation court appeals where no jury trial is demanded, family court matters, eviction actions, juvenile and probate proceedings, harassment and protection-order proceedings, election contests, consumer credit contract actions and mechanics' lien actions.

Question 6

How long did the other side have to answer before a Minnesota Rule 37.01(b) motion is ripe?

Accepted Answer

Thirty days, with two Minnesota variations that change the arithmetic. Rule 33.01(b) sets 30 days from service of the interrogatories, except that a defendant may answer or object within 45 days after service of the summons and complaint, and lets the court on motion and notice and for good cause shown enlarge or shorten the time. Rule 34.02(c)(1) sets 30 days from actual or deemed service under Rule 26.04(b) and gives a defendant no 45-day allowance. Rule 36.01 sets 30 days on a request for admission, with a 45-day floor for a defendant unless the court shortens the time. The first variation is that deemed-service rule: a Rule 34 request delivered early is considered served when the parties have held their Rule 26.06 planning conference and prepared a discovery plan, so delivering early does not accelerate the response date. The second is what happens when an objection arrives rather than nothing: under Rule 33.01(c) answers to interrogatories to which objection has been made are deferred until the objections are determined, so there is no overdue answer to compel until the objection is resolved, and the rule lets you move on the objection itself at any time. Note also that Rule 26.04(a) bars seeking discovery from any source before the parties have held that planning conference and prepared a discovery plan, so if that never happened there was no discovery properly sought in the first place.

Question 7

My Minnesota dispute involves a non-party witness. Which court hears it?

Accepted Answer

A different one, and Rule 37.01(a) draws the line on the county. An application for an order to a party shall be made to the court in which the action is pending. An application for an order to a person who is not a party shall be made to the court in the county where the discovery is being, or is to be, taken. So a deposition taken in another Minnesota county is enforced there rather than in your own case's county, and filing in the wrong place costs time. Two consequences follow. The Gen. R. Prac. 115 machinery still applies to that filing, so the 21-day, 14-day and 7-day schedule and the Rule 115.05 memorandum restriction travel with it. And Rule 37.01(d)'s expense provisions reach a deponent as well as a party in both directions, so a non-party who resists successfully can recover against you, while a non-party whose conduct necessitated the motion can be ordered to pay. This page does not cover how a subpoena is issued or served, which is separate machinery.

Question 8

Does Minnesota limit how much discovery can be demanded in the first place?

Accepted Answer

Yes, but through a proportionality duty rather than a number, and it sits in an unusual place. Minn. R. Civ. P. 1, the scope rule, adds a sentence the federal Rule 1 has no counterpart to: it is the responsibility of the court and the parties to examine each civil action to assure that the process and the costs are proportionate to the amount in controversy and the complexity and importance of the issues. The rule then lists the factors the court is to consider in making a proportionality assessment, without limitation: needs of the case, amount in controversy, parties' resources, and complexity and importance of the issues at stake in the litigation. Note who that binds. It is addressed to the court and the parties jointly, which makes it an argument available to you on a motion and an argument available against you. There is a second, structural limit earlier in the case: Rule 26.04(a) bars parties from seeking discovery from any source before they have held their Rule 26.06 planning conference and prepared a discovery plan, except in a proceeding exempt from initial disclosure, or when allowed by stipulation or court order. This page does not state a Minnesota cap on the number of interrogatories in either direction. Attorney review of the papers is available as an option.

Minnesota Motion to Compel

Find out where you stand in Minnesota

Introduction

Key Things to Know

Key decisions before you file

Customize your Motion to Compel Template with DocDraft

Minnesota Requirements for Motion to Compel

The Memorandum, Restricted to the Requests, the Responses and Why They Are Improper

Which Subdivision of Rule 37.01 You Are Moving Under

The Court, Which Changes If the Target Is Not a Party

Whether You Are Filing a Motion or Asking for the Informal Conference

The Twenty One Day Service and Filing Package

The Rule 115.10 Certification to the Court, Before the Hearing

Proof the Response Period Had Run, or That an Objection Deferred It

The Expense Request, and What Happens If You Lose

Frequently Asked Questions