Post-Trial Options If Client Disagrees with Order (Amd Findings, New Trial, Reconsideration, Appeal)

Amended Findings, New Trial, Reconsideration Request, and Appeal

 

Preface:

• As a threshold matter, if a party does not file a motion for amended findings or a new trial, the Court of Appeal’s scope of review is limited to the substantive legal issues properly raised to and considered by the district court, whether the evidence supports the district court’s findings of fact, and whether those findings support the conclusions of law and the judgment. See Alpha Real Est. Co. of Rochester v. Delta Dental Plan of Minn., 664 N.W.2d 303, 309-10 (Minn. 2003) (stating that new-trial motion is not a prerequisite to appellate review of substantive legal issues properly raised and considered in district court); Gruenhagen v. Larson, 246 N.W.2d 565, 569 (Minn. 1976) (stating that, absent motion for new trial, appellate courts may review whether evidence supports findings of fact and whether findings support conclusions of law and judgment).
• Fees (both conduct and need-based) may be sought at in any of these scenarios. If it’s one of the motions, then it’s the same as any request for fees under Minn. Stat 518.14. If it’s appellate based fees that is different with different rules.

Motion for Amended Findings

Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 52 governs

• Upon a party’s motion, the district court “may amend its findings or make additional findings, and may amend the judgment accordingly.” Minn. R. Civ. P. 52.02.
• The purpose of a motion for amended findings “is to permit the trial court a review of its own exercise of discretion.” Stroh v. Stroh, 383 N.W.2d 402, 407 (Minn.App.1986).
• Essentially questions the sufficiency of the evidence to support the Findings of Fact.
• Attempts to change the Court’s Order by presenting legal arguments and facts to the Court which inform the Court why its “Findings of Facts” and consequently, its resulting Order was erroneous.
• A motion for amended findings is proper if it “both identif[es] the alleged defect in the challenged findings and explain[s] why the challenged findings are defective.”
• A motion to amend findings must be based on the files, exhibits, and minutes of the court, not on evidence that is not a part of the record Otte v. Otte, 368 N.W.2d 293, 299 (Minn.App.1985) (applying Minn. R. Civ. P. 52.02) or based on post-trial conduct
• When considering a motion for amended findings, a district court “must apply the evidence as submitted during the trial of the case” and “may neither go outside the record, nor consider new evidence.” Rathbun v. W.T. Grant Co., 300 Minn. 223, 238, 219 N.W.2d 641, 651 (1974).
• Brought before the very same Judge who issued the Order
• An appropriate motion must inform the Court of the precise “Findings of Fact” being challenged and must also inform the Court what the Court should issue in the form of revised Findings of Fact.  In other words, it is not enough to inform the Court about the errors (what the Court did wrong), the Court must also be informed of the remedy (what the Court should have done).
• Findings of fact, whether based on oral or documentary evidence, shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and due regard shall be given to the opportunity of the trial court to judge the credibility of the witnesses.  A finding is “clearly erroneous” when this court has “the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made.” Vangsness v. Vangsness, 607 N.W.2d 468, 472 (Minn.App.2000)
• Upon motion of a party served and heard, the court may amend its findings or make additional findings, and may amend the judgment accordingly if judgment has been entered.
• The motion may be made in conjunction with a motion for a new trial. (Titled as Motion for Amended Findings and/or New Trial)
• The standard of review that is used is abuse of discretion for a motion to amend findings, See Preferred Fin. Corp. v. Quality Homes, Inc., 439 N.W.2d 741, 743 (Minn.App.1989)

Timelines:

• Motion must be served/filed within 30 days after a notice by a party of the filing of the decision. The motion shall be heard within 60 days after a notice by a party of the filing of the decision, unless the time for hearing be extended by the court within the 60-day period for good cause shown.
• A Motion for Amended Findings will toll (extend) the running of the time to appeal (MInn. App. P. R. 104.01…also note that the timeline run from the final entry of said motion.  so that means if you have a trial 30 days to file a motion for amended findings…it’s resolved then you have 60 days from that final order to amend the findings.

Motion for a New Trial

Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 59 governs

A party may move for a new trial on the grounds of:

• (a)Irregularity in the proceedings of the court, referee, jury, or prevailing party, or any order or abuse of discretion, whereby the moving party was deprived of a fair trial;
• (b)Misconduct of the jury or prevailing party
• (c)Accident or surprise which could not have been prevented by ordinary prudence;
• (d)Material evidence newly discovered, which with reasonable diligence could not have been found and produced at the trial;
  • Generally, newly discovered evidence “must have been in existence at the time of trial but not known to the party at that time.” Swanson v. Williams, 303 Minn. 433, 436, 228 N.W.2d 860, 862 (1975).
• (e)Excessive or insufficient damages, appearing to have been given under the influence of passion or prejudice;
• (f)Errors of law occurring at the trial, and objected to at the time or, if no objection need have been made pursuant to Rules 46 and 51, plainly assigned in the notice of motion;
• (g) The verdict, decision, or report is not justified by the evidence, or is contrary to law; but, unless it be so expressly stated in the order granting a new trial, it shall not be presumed, on appeal, to have been made on the ground that the verdict, decision, or report was not justified by the evidence.

• A motion for new trial shall be made and heard on the files, exhibits, and minutes of the court.
• Pertinent facts that would not be a part of the minutes may be shown by affidavit.
• A full or partial transcript of the court reporter’s notes may be used on the hearing of the motion.
• “[d]enial of a new trial based on grounds other than error of law is within the broad discretion of the trial court” See Maloney v. Ketter, 408 N.W.2d 865, 868 (Minn.App.1987)
• The district court has the discretion to grant a new trial, and the court of appeals will not disturb the district court’s decision absent a clear abuse of that discretion. Halla Nursery, Inc. v. Baumann–Furrie & Co., 454 N.W.2d 905, 910 (Minn.1990).
• The motion may be made in conjunction with a motion for amended findings. (Titled as Motion for Amended Findings and/or New Trial)
• If new trial motion is based on error of law then the standard of review is DeNovo
• If the new trial motion is not based on an error of law it is abuse of discretion standard of review.

Timelines:

• Motion must be served/filed within 30 days after a notice by a party of the filing of the decision. The motion shall be heard within 60 days after a notice by a party of the filing of the decision, unless the time for hearing be extended by the court within the 60-day period for good cause shown.
• When a motion for a new trial is based upon affidavits, they shall be served with the notice of motion. The opposing party shall have 14 days after such service in which to serve opposing affidavits, which period may be extended by the court pursuant to Rule 59.03. The court may permit reply affidavits. Except as limited by Rule 59.03, the deadlines for serving any permitted affidavits may be established or modified by order under Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 115.0l(c).
• A Motion for a New Trial will toll (extend) the running of the time to appeal

 

Note on Evidentiary Issues and how they related to Motion for Amended Findings and Motion for New Trial: It is generally true that “evidentiary rulings . . . are subject to appellate review only if there has been a motion for a new trial in which such matters have been assigned as error.” Sauter v. Wasemiller, 389 N.W.2d 200, 201 (Minn. 1986). But “in the context of a bench trial,” a motion for amended findings serves the same purpose as a motion for a new trial, and thus similarly preserves evidentiary rulings for appellate review. Jacobson v. $55,900 in U.S. Currency, 728 N.W.2d 510, 524 (Minn. 2007).

 

Request to File a Motion for Reconsideration (Reconsideration Request)

Minn Gen. R. Prac. 115.11 governs

YOU MUST REQUEST AND BE GRANTED PERMISSION TO FILE A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION.

• Motions for reconsideration play a very limited role in civil practice, and should be approached cautiously and used sparingly. the rule requires “Compelling Circumstances”
• Counsel should understand that although the courts may have the power to reconsider decisions, they rarely will exercise it. They are likely to do so only where intervening legal developments have occurred (e.g., enactment of an applicable statute or issuance of a dispositive court decision) or where the earlier decision is palpably wrong in some respect.
• Motions for reconsideration are not opportunities for presentation of facts or arguments available when the prior motion was considered.
• To request to file a motion, a letter directed to the Judge who issued the decisions should be prepared and filed. The letter shall be no more than 2 pages in length and a copy must be served upon all other parties. The court will then respond by granting the request to file the motion or denying the request.
• If the request is denied, that’s the end of it. If the request is granted, then you follow the standard motion procedure – get a motion date, prepare your motion and file/serve at least 21 days beforehand.
• Motions for reconsideration will not be allowed to “expand” or “supplement” the record on appeal. See, e.g., Sullivan v. Spot Weld, Inc., 560 N.W.2d 712 (Minn. App. 1997); Progressive Cos. Ins. Co. v. Fiedler, 1997 WL 292332 (Minn. App. 1997) (unpublished).
• A motion for reconsideration does not toll/extend any time periods or deadlines, including the time to appeal.

Timelines: 

• Neither requesting leave to file such a motion to reconsider, the granting of that request so the motion can be filed, nor the actual filing of the motion will toll or extend the time to appeal. A party seeking to proceed with a motion for reconsideration should pay attention to the appellate calendar and must perfect the appeal regardless of what progress has occurred with the reconsideration motion.
• Failure to file a timely appeal may be fatal to later review. If a timely appeal is filed notwithstanding the pendency of a request for reconsideration in the trial court, the Court of Appeals can accept the appeal as timely, but stay it to permit consideration of the reconsideration motion. See Marzitelli v. City of Little Canada, 582 N.W.2d 904, 907 (Minn. 1998),

Appeal

See also: 2024 Summary of MN Appellate Procedure

For sample forms provided by Court see: Minnesota Judicial Branch – Forms Appendix for the Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure – Court Rules

MN Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure, Rule 104.01 governs

• Appeals are generally used when one party feels the court misapplied the law. Not agreeing with the factual determinations made by the Court should not be the basis for an appeal.
• A party may elect to appeal an issue only after learning that another party has appealed. If a party decides to file an appeal only after OPA/OPP has filed their appeal, they should draft a subsequent notice of appeal denominated as “Notice of Related Appeal” which will suffice to raise any issue arising from the same trial court action. See Appendix for form of Notice of Related Appeal (Form 103C).
• As a threshold matter, if a party does not file a motion for amended findings or a new trial, the Court of Appeal’s scope of review is limited to the substantive legal issues properly raised to and considered by the district court, whether the evidence supports the district court’s findings of fact, and whether those findings support the conclusions of law and the judgment. See Alpha Real Est. Co. of Rochester v. Delta Dental Plan of Minn., 664 N.W.2d 303, 309-10 (Minn. 2003) (stating that new-trial motion is not a prerequisite to appellate review of substantive legal issues properly raised and considered in district court); Gruenhagen v. Larson, 246 N.W.2d 565, 569 (Minn. 1976) (stating that, absent motion for new trial, appellate courts may review whether evidence supports findings of fact and whether findings support conclusions of law and judgment).

Effect of Post-Decision Motions on Appeals

Unless otherwise provided by law, if any party serves and files a proper and timely motion of a type specified immediately below, the time for appeal of the order or judgment that is the subject of such motion runs for all parties from the service by any party of notice of filing of the order disposing of the last such motion outstanding. This provision applies to a proper and timely motion:

• (a) for judgment as a matter of law under Minn. R. Civ. P. 50.02;
• (b) to amend or make findings of fact under Minn. R. Civ. P. 52.02, whether or not granting the motion would alter the judgment;
• (c) to alter or amend the judgment under Minn. R. Civ. P. 52.02;
• (d) for a new trial under Minn. R. Civ. P. 59;
• (e) for relief under Minn. R. Civ. P. 60 if the motion is filed within the time for a motion for new trial; or
• (f) in proceedings not governed by the Rules of Civil Procedure, a proper and timely motion that seeks the same or equivalent relief as those motions listed in (a)-(e).

Timelines:

• Unless a different time is provided by statute, an appeal may be taken from a judgment within 60 days after its entry, and from an appealable order within 60 days after service by any party of written notice of its filing.
• An appeal may be taken from a judgment entered pursuant to Minn. R. Civ. P. 54.02, within 60 days of the entry of the judgment only if the trial court makes an express determination that there is no just reason for delay and expressly directs the entry of a final judgment. The time to appeal from any other judgment entered pursuant to Rule 54.02 shall not begin to run until the entry of a judgment which adjudicates all the claims and rights and liabilities of the remaining parties.
• The non-appealing party may choose to serve and file a subsequent notice of related appeal within 14 days of the service of the first notice of appeal by another party, even if that occurs on the last day to appeal; it does not shorten the normal appeal period even if a party serves and files an appeal on the first possible day.