Precedential Opinions

Under Minn. Rule of Civil Appellate Procedure 136.01, the Court of Appeals issues a precedential opinion (formerly called "published opinions") only to clarify or develop the law. In deciding whether to issue a precedential opinion, the court considers multiple factors listed in Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 136.01, subd. (1)(b), including whether the case establishes a new principle or rule of law, clarifies existing case law, decides a novel issue involving a constitutional provision, statute, administrative rule or rule of court, or resolves a significant or recurring legal issue. Precedential opinions will be considered and used by courts faced with similar issues in the future, and they are published in books of caselaw found in most law libraries. Under Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 128.02, subd. 1(f), parties may advise the court whether a precedential opinion would be helpful.

DECISIONS OF THE COURT OF APPEALS
FILED MONDAY, MAY 11, 2026

A25-0834 State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Renee Zhoushkogeshig Gale, Appellant.
Hennepin County District Court, Hon. Bev Benson, Hon. Judge Jane Maschka.
When determining whether the emergency-aid exception to the warrant requirement justifies a seizure under article I, section 10 of the Minnesota Constitution, a police officer’s subjective intent is irrelevant.
Affirmed. Judge Rachel F. Bond.

SPECIAL TERM OPINION

A26-0407 In re Washington County, Petitioner, State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Erik Lawrence Bader, Respondent.
Washington County District Court, Hon. Juanita C. Freeman.
An order requiring a county to pay attorney fees arising from the state’s motion under Minn. Stat. § 611.47, subd. 1 (2024), is independently appealable under Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 103.03(g).
Writ denied. Chief Judge Jennifer L. Frisch.

Court of Appeals Opinions