Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 114.05
As amended through October 28, 2024
Persons, other than the petitioner, agency, and attorney general, may participate in the declaratory judgment action only with leave of the Court of Appeals. Permission may be sought by filing a motion with the Court of Appeals pursuant to Rule 127 or Rule 129 and serving that motion upon all other parties. The motion shall describe the nature of the movant's participation below, the interest which would be represented in the declaratory judgment action, and the manner in which the rule affects the rights or privileges of the moving party.
Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 114.05
By statute the Court of Appeals is granted original jurisdiction to review by declaratory judgment the validity of administrative rules promulgated by a state agency. Minnesota Statutes, section 14.44(1996). The statute contains no provisions regarding the procedure by which this review is to be accomplished. The Court of Appeals promulgated MINN. APP. SPEC. R. PRACT. 10, effective October 25, 1991, to provide a procedural framework for such proceedings, but the Special Rules of Practice are not routinely referred to by the practicing bar when trying to determine matters of appellate procedure. To remedy this problem, a new rule, Rule 114,has been adopted.
A declaratory judgment action in the Court of Appeals is the proper method to challenge a rule prior to its application or enforcement. The grounds for challenging a rule, which must be described in the petition required by Rule 114.02, are prescribed by Minnesota Statutes, section 14.45(1996). Only formally promulgated rules may be challenged in a pre-enforcement action under Minnesota Statutes, section 14.44. Minnesota Educ. Ass'n v. Minnesota State Bd. of Educ., 499 N.W.2d 846, 849 (Minn. App. 1993). This pre-enforcement challenge must be distinguished from a contested case action in which a rule is applied to a particular party and the validity of the rule, as illustrated by the application in the individual case, may be considered. See Mammenga v. State Dep't of Human Servs., 442 N.W. 2d 786 (Minn. 1989).
Advisory Committee Comment-2009 Amendments
Rule 114 is amended to alter the timing rules for briefing. The change is made to delay the first deadline for filing a brief to 30 days after the record is transmitted to the appellate courts and the itemized list is provided to all parties.