Legal Memorandum: Lack of Subject Matter Jurisdiction Defense

Issue: Whether filing a Motion to Dismiss under Minn. R. Civ. P. 12.08(c), seeking dismissal based on a lack of subject matter jurisdiction is proper.

Area of Law: Litigation & Procedure
Keywords: Lack of subject matter jurisdiction; Motion for summary judgment; No genuine disputes of material fact
Jurisdiction: Minnesota
Cited Cases: 718 N.W.2d 879
Cited Statutes: Minn. R. Civ. P. 12.08(c); Minn. R. Civ. P. 12.02; Minn. R. Civ. P. 56.03,
Date: 11/01/2006

Minn. R. Civ. P. 12.02 makes clear that if such a defense is made after the responsive pleading, and the court is presented with evidence outside the pleadings, the motion is treated as a motion for summary judgment under Rule 56.  Under Minn. R. Civ. P. 56.03, summary judgment is only proper if there are no genuine disputes of material fact and the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law.  State Farm Fire & Cas. v. Aquila Inc., 718 N.W.2d 879, 883 (Minn. 2006).  In determining a motion for summary judgment, the court views the evidence in a light most favorable to the non-moving party.  Id. at 883. 


Subscribe to Litigation Pathfinder

To get the full-text of this Legal Memorandum ... and more!

(Month-to-month and annual subscriptions available)