The Hail Mary of Inherent Authority: Understanding Missed Appeal Deadlines in Minnesota
The first and most important part of an appeal is making sure it is filed before the deadline. In federal courts, if you miss the appeal deadline, it is possible to make a motion to allow the appeal to proceed despite the delay. Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5). There is no such rule in Minnesota. That means if you miss the appeal deadline you are out of luck – well, almost.
What is Inherent Authority in Appeals?
There is one exceedingly narrow exception. The Supreme Court can exercise its inherent authority to allow an appeal to proceed even though it was untimely. Notably, the Court of Appeals has no such authority, so the Court of Appeals will dismiss the appeal and the appellant will have to petition for Supreme Court review as a last stitch effort.
The Supreme Court has complete discretion as to when it exercises its inherent authority. Usually, it will only do so if there is some extremely odd procedural irregularity in which it would be unfair to deprive the appellant of the right to appeal.
Recent Cases Where Inherent Authority Was Invoked
A few examples from the past year illustrate the type of peculiar circumstances in which inherent authority has been invoked:
· In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of Nicholas Scott Thompson, A25-0117 and In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of A.N.C and P.D.C, A25-0070 both involved delays in obtaining court-appointed counsel. Although the Supreme Court did not specify the reasons for invoking its inherent authority, it is likely because the delay was largely the fault of the court, not the appellant. In addition, both cases involved important rights – an order to treat the appellant with neuroleptic medications and an order terminating parental rights.
· In Esposito v. W. Peyton Co., A24-1058, the legislature had recently lengthened the appeal deadline for a decision by an unemployment law judge (ULJ). The new appeal deadline was effective only for decisions after a certain date. The ULJ’s decision sent to the appellant stated the new, longer appeal deadline applied, but in fact the case was subject to the older, shorter deadline. The appellant, relying on the instructions from the ULJ’s decision, filed the appeal too late. The Supreme Court invoked its inherent authority to grant relief, likely because the ULJ bore some responsibility for misleading the appellant.
· Similarly, in Wells Fargo Bank, Nat’l Ass’n v. True Gravity Ventures, LLC, No. A24-0787, 2025 WL 2055831 (Minn. July 23, 2025), the district court entered judgment but failed to send notice of entry of judgment to the parties until after the 60-day appeal deadline had expired. The Supreme Court described the case as “a conundrum of our own making” because the court should have provided notice and the rules contained no mechanism for relief when the court fails to do so. The Supreme Court exercised its inherent authority to allow the appeal.
· Lastly, in Hagle v. Gossett Properties, LLC, A25-0526, the appellant attempted to serve the respondent within the appeal deadline, but mistakenly sent the notice of appeal to the old address of the law firm representing the respondent. The parties disputed whether the appellant had been adequately informed of the change of address. The Supreme Court found it unnecessary to decide whether the change of address notification was sufficient and instead invoked its inherent authority to allow the appeal regardless. Although the Court provided little explanation for its decision, it was probably relevant that the appellant was self-represented and the respondent was represented by one of the largest law firms in Minnesota.
Inherent Authority Appeals Remain a Rare Outcome
The commonality between these cases seems to be that none of the appellants were entirely at fault for their missed deadline and in most cases the court bore part of the responsibility. Notably, in Wells Fargo Bank, Nat’l Ass’n v. True Gravity Ventures, LLC, No. A24-0787, the Supreme Court suggested that a rule change might be appropriate to address at least some of these rare but recurring situations. It is unknown what any such rule change might entail. Until then, a plea for the Supreme Court to invoke its inherent authority remains the one and only last possible option when an appeal deadline is missed. And it is a very, very long shot.