Tomorrow is the big day, that is, July 1, the effective date of the amendments to the Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure.

In an earlier blog post, Greg discussed the big change to the Summons. He posted again when it was available on practicelaw and also explained why practicelaw was not preparing a similarly new summons for family law matters. The new Summons form is now quite a big longer, but written in “plain English” thus more understandable to the lay person. We posted the new Summons on practicelaw beside the old form. Today, the old form comes down.

The revision impacts other forms as well. The current Uniform Conveyancing Blank 40.6.2, Notice of Lis Pendens for Mechanic’s Lien Action, contains the required, soon to be outdated, summons.

When the Uniform Conveyancing Blank (UCB) Task Force met a few weeks ago, they discussed whether to replace the old summons language with the new or, given the increased length, whether to add it as an attachment. Being the careful wordsmiths they are, they turned to the statute which requires a lis pendens to be recorded. Minn. Stat. 514.12, subd. 1 provides in part:

At the beginning of the action the plaintiff shall file for record with the county recorder or, if registered land, with the registrar of titles of the county in which it is brought, and of the several counties if the lien be claimed under section 514.04, a notice of the pendency thereof, embracing therein a copy of the summons, omitting the caption. (emphasis added).

So while the summons itself is now clear, not so the statute. After a mildly spirited discussion, reasonable minds differed and the Task Force adjourned, tabling the revision to UCB 40.6.2 until its next meeting in September. Today we will also take down this now-outdated UCB and add a note to practitioners.

In addition to the new summons form, the Supreme Court’s Order also addresses other rules. Counsel to the committee that recommended the revision provided this summary:

Subpoena (Rule 45 and Commitment Rule 25): prevents use of ex parte investigation or discovery by: (a) expressly requiring the party issuing a subpoena to a non-party to allow all parties to participate in any production that occurs after issuance of the subpoena to a non-party, including any change in production —whether at a different time or with a different scope of production; and (b) creates a seven-day period after service of a subpoena during which the production cannot take place to permit other parties to seek a protective order against the discovery occurring.  Concerns were raised during the comment period about subpoenas for trial and commitment proceedings requiring a shorter time frame.  The Court has relocated some of the changes proposed by the committee and added language clarifying that the 7-day period relates to production subpoenas.  The Court also added a separate 24-hour period for commitment cases in the Commitment Rules.

Taxation of costs (Rule 54 and Gen. R. Prac. 127): clarifies the procedure for taxing costs by: (a) establishing deadlines for submitting costs and objections; (b) allowing determination of costs, at the court’s discretion, by either the court administrator or district court judge, with an appeal to the district court judge if the administrator determines costs as is now allowed; (c) remove limits in Gen. R. Prac. 127 on the amount of expert witness fees that can be taxed by the administrator; and (d) creation of a revised taxation of costs submission form to be developed by the State Court Administrator and modeled generally on the form used in Minnesota’s appellate courts (a suggested form was included in the committee’s November 2009 report).

So, say goodbye to June and “embrace” July and all that it brings.