Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 103.04
As amended through October 28, 2024
The appellate courts may reverse, affirm or modify the judgment or order appealed from or take any other action as the interest of justice may require.
On appeal from or review of an order the appellate courts may review any order affecting the order from which the appeal is taken and on appeal from a judgment may review any order involving the merits or affecting the judgment. They may review any other matter as the interest of justice may require. The scope of review afforded may be affected by whether proper steps have been taken to preserve issues for review on appeal, including the existence of timely and proper post-trial motions.
Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 103.04
The rule has been changed to make clear that the scope of review can and often does depend upon the scope of the trial proceedings. As a general proposition, appellate review is limited to review of the facts and legal arguments that are contained in the trial record. The conduct of the trial proceedings will affect the scope of review on appeal. See Sauter v. Wasemiller, 389 N.W.2d 200 (Minn. 1986); Northwestern State Bank v. Foss, 287 Minn. 508, 511, 177 N.W.2d 292, 294 (1970). This is true notwithstanding the broad statement of the appellate courts' scope of review contained in Rule 103.04. See Minnesota Constitution, article 6, section 2.
Litigants often fail to recognize the importance of post-trial motions, and the sometimes dramatic failure to bring them. Though commentators have alerted lawyers to this issue, see 3 ERIC J. MAGNUSON & DAVID F. HERR, MINNESOTA PRACTICE: APPELLATE RULES ANNOTATED, section 103.17 (3d ed. 1996), problems associated with failure to file appropriate post-trial motions continues to be a significant, recurring problem. This rule amendment is intended to ameliorate the problem.