ucappeals.orgUnemployment appeals, state by state

Minnesota — unemployment insurance benefit appeals

Agency
Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED)
Verified on
Statutes cited
Minnesota Statutes ch. 268 §§ 268.035, 268.069, 268.101, 268.103, 268.105, 268.18; ch. 480A § 480A.06 (Court of Appeals jurisdiction); ch. 645 §§ 645.15 (computation of time), 645.44 (holidays).
Rules cited
Minnesota Rules ch. 3310 (Unemployment Appeals) parts 3310.2901, 3310.2902, 3310.2905, 3310.2914, 3310.2916, 3310.2917, 3310.2921.

What is unusual here: Minnesota gives a claimant 45 calendar days to appeal — the longest first-level window in this reference, half again the 30 days that was the previous maximum — and then supplies no way whatever to excuse a filing made on day 46. The statute is written as a command to dismiss:

The unemployment law judge must issue a decision dismissing the appeal as untimely if the judge decides the appeal was not filed within 45 calendar days after the sending of the determination.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 1a(c), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

The same 45 days recurs at every later stage, so the deadline neither tightens nor relaxes as a case climbs. The chain it governs is the shortest in this reference: there is no board, no commission, and no appeal tribunal anywhere between the determination and the courts. One official — an "unemployment law judge," who must be a department employee licensed to practice law in Minnesota — holds the hearing, and the request for reconsideration that stands in for a second level goes back to that same judge:

A request for reconsideration must be decided by the unemployment law judge who issued the decision under subdivision 1a unless that judge: (1) is no longer employed by the department; (2) is on an extended or indefinite leave; or (3) has been removed from the proceedings by the chief unemployment law judge.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 2(e), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

That step is not optional in the way a rehearing motion is elsewhere: the Court of Appeals reviews "the decision on reconsideration," so there is nothing for a court to take until the judge has reconsidered. And a claimant reaches all of it for free — no person other than an attorney may charge an applicant a fee of any kind, and no applicant may be charged fees, costs, or disbursements in front of the judge or either court.

A. Bodies

A1. Agency

"Department" means the Department of Employment and Economic Development. — Minn. Stat. § 268.035, subd. 12a, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.035

"Commissioner" means the commissioner of employment and economic development.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.035, subd. 8a, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.035

Law. Throughout chapter 268 the acting official is "the commissioner"; the entity is "the department."

A2. First-level body

The first-level appeal is a hearing before a single unemployment law judge, not a multi-member tribunal or panel:

Upon a timely appeal to a determination having been filed or upon a referral for direct hearing under section 268.101, subdivision 3a, the chief unemployment law judge must set a time and date for a de novo due process hearing and send notice to any applicant and any employer, by mail or electronic transmission, not less than ten calendar days before the date of the hearing.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 1(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

Qualification of the judges:

Only employees of the department who are attorneys licensed to practice law in Minnesota may serve as the chief unemployment law judge, senior unemployment law judges who are supervisors, or unemployment law judges. The commissioner must designate a chief unemployment law judge.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 1b(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

Law. The rule chapter that governs the hearing itself (Minn. R. ch. 3310, parts 3310.2901–.2924, the only parts of that chapter still in force) defines "Hearing" consistently with the statute:

"Hearing" means the evidentiary hearing authorized under Minnesota Statutes, section 268.105, subdivision 1.

— Minn. R. 3310.2902, subp. 4b, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/3310.2902/

Law. NOT FOUND IN PRIMARY SOURCE: any statutory or rule text using the phrase "appeal tribunal" for Minnesota's first-level body — the corpus consistently uses "unemployment law judge."

A3. Second-level body

There is no separate appellate board. A request for reconsideration goes back to the judge who decided the case:

Any party, or the commissioner, may within 45 calendar days of the sending of the unemployment law judge's decision under subdivision 1a, file a request for reconsideration asking the judge to reconsider that decision.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 2(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

Reassignment is the exception, not the rule (quoted in full in the front matter, § 268.105, subd. 2(e)). Law. The deadline and on-the-record/de-novo character of this step belong to field F of the full schema and are out of scope for this part; A3 states only which body decides it.

B. First-level appeal

B1. Deadline

45 calendar days, running from the sending of the determination — not from delivery or receipt.

A determination of eligibility or determination of ineligibility is final unless an appeal is filed by the applicant or employer within 45 calendar days after sending. The determination must contain a prominent statement indicating the consequences of not appealing. Proceedings on the appeal are conducted in accordance with section 268.105.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.101, subd. 2(f), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.101

The same 45-day-from-sending trigger is restated from the deciding judge's side:

The unemployment law judge must issue a decision dismissing the appeal as untimely if the judge decides the appeal was not filed within 45 calendar days after the sending of the determination.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 1a(c), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

Law. An amended determination issued on the commissioner's own motion (before an appeal is filed and before the original determination becomes final) restarts the same 45-day clock from its own sending:

Any amended determination is final unless an appeal is filed by the applicant or notified employer within 45 calendar days after sending.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.101, subd. 4, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.101

Law. A separate 45-day-plus-mailing-days deadline exists in § 268.105, subd. 7(a) for a judicial review petition to the Court of Appeals from a reconsideration decision ("[t]hree days are added to the 45-calendar-day period if the decision on reconsideration was mailed"). That is a different deadline for a different stage (F3, not this part's B1), and the three-added-mailing-days rule is not written into the first-level appeal deadline anywhere read in this corpus.

NOT FOUND IN PRIMARY SOURCE: an express definition of "sending" itself in §§ 268.035, 268.101, 268.103, or 268.105. The determination statute repeatedly pairs "sending" with the method — "by mail or electronic transmission" (§ 268.101, subd. 2(a)) — so "sending" appears to mean the date the department dispatches the determination by whichever of those two channels it used, but no single definitional subdivision states this. Inference.

B2. Weekend/holiday rule

NOT FOUND IN PRIMARY SOURCE within chapter 268 itself: no provision of §§ 268.101, 268.103, or 268.105 read in this corpus states what happens if the 45th day falls on a weekend or holiday.

Minnesota's general statutory-construction chapter supplies a default rule for any period "fixed by law":

Where the performance or doing of any act, duty, matter, payment, or thing is ordered or directed, and the period of time or duration for the performance or doing thereof is prescribed and fixed by law, the time, except as otherwise provided in sections 645.13 and 645.14, shall be computed so as to exclude the first and include the last day of the prescribed or fixed period or duration of time. When the last day of the period falls on Saturday, Sunday, or a legal holiday, that day shall be omitted from the computation.

— Minn. Stat. § 645.15, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/645.15

Inference that § 645.15 governs the 45-day appeal window: nothing in chapter 268 cross-references § 645.15 for this specific deadline, but § 645.15 by its own terms reaches any period "fixed by law," and no chapter-268 text was found displacing it here. Under this reading, if the 45th day is a Saturday, Sunday, or "legal holiday," the deadline falls on the next day that is none of those.

"Holiday" for Minnesota statutory purposes:

"Holiday" includes New Year's Day, January 1; Martin Luther King's Birthday, the third Monday in January; Washington's and Lincoln's Birthday, the third Monday in February; Memorial Day, the last Monday in May; Juneteenth, June 19; Independence Day, July 4; Labor Day, the first Monday in September; Indigenous Peoples Day, the second Monday in October; Veterans Day, November 11; Thanksgiving Day, the fourth Thursday in November; and Christmas Day, December 25; provided, when New Year's Day, January 1; or Juneteenth, June 19; or Independence Day, July 4; or Veterans Day, November 11; or Christmas Day, December 25; falls on Sunday, the following day shall be a holiday and, provided, when New Year's Day, January 1; or Juneteenth, June 19; or Independence Day, July 4; or Veterans Day, November 11; or Christmas Day, December 25; falls on Saturday, the preceding day shall be a holiday.

— Minn. Stat. § 645.44, subd. 5(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/645.44

Law, subject to the same inference flagged above that this general chapter applies to the chapter-268 appeal deadline.

B3. How to file; required form/method

Filing by mail is guaranteed for an applicant regardless of what other channels the commissioner opens:

The commissioner must allow an applicant to file an appeal by mail even if an appeal by electronic transmission is allowed.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.103, subd. 2(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.103

No particular form or wording is required — any written statement that reasonably conveys disagreement counts:

A written statement delivered or mailed to the department that could reasonably be interpreted to mean that an involved applicant is in disagreement with a specific determination or decision is considered an appeal. No specific words need be used for the written statement to be considered an appeal.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.103, subd. 2(b), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.103

Law. Electronic filing exists at the commissioner's discretion and, when allowed, is subject to whatever manner/format restriction the commissioner sets and prints on the determination itself (§ 268.103, subd. 1(a)–(b)); that discretionary channel is layered on top of, not a substitute for, the mail guarantee above.

For a determination when an appeal is filed by mail, the filing date is fixed by the general chapter-268 definitions section:

"Filing" or "filed" means the personal delivery of an application, appeal, or other required action to the commissioner or any of the commissioner's agents, or if done by mail, deposited in the United States mail properly addressed to the department with postage prepaid, in which case it is considered filed on the day indicated by the cancellation mark of the United States Postal Service. If an application, appeal, or other required action is made by electronic transmission, it is considered filed on the day received by the department.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.035, subd. 17, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.035

Law. One filing-channel restriction applies specifically to an employer's paid agent, not to the applicant or to the employer acting directly:

If an agent files an appeal on behalf of an employer, the appeal must be filed online. The appeal must be filed through the electronic address provided on the determination being appealed. Use of another method of filing does not constitute an appeal. This paragraph does not apply to: (1) an employee filing an appeal on behalf of an employer; or (2) an attorney licensed to practice law who is directly representing the employer on appeal.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.103, subd. 2a(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.103

Law. This is an employer-side/agent-specific rule (schema field G), noted here only because it is a filing-method exception to the general rule above.

B4. Late appeals — good cause?

No good-cause exception is stated for an untimely appeal of a determination. The statute is written as a mandatory dismissal, not a standard to be met:

The unemployment law judge must issue a decision dismissing the appeal as untimely if the judge decides the appeal was not filed within 45 calendar days after the sending of the determination. The unemployment law judge may dismiss the appeal by summary decision, or the judge may conduct a hearing to obtain evidence on the timeliness of the appeal.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 1a(c), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

The only discretion given is procedural (summary decision versus an evidentiary hearing on the timeliness question itself, e.g., a factual dispute about when the determination was sent or the appeal was filed) — not a substantive excuse for missing the deadline.

"Good cause" does appear twice in § 268.105, but for different problems, neither of which is a late appeal of the underlying determination:

By failing to participate, the appealing party is considered to have failed to exhaust available administrative remedies unless the appealing party files a request for reconsideration under subdivision 2 and establishes good cause for failing to participate in the hearing. — Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 1a(b), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

"Good cause" for purposes of this paragraph is a reason that would have prevented a reasonable person acting with due diligence from submitting the evidence.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 2(c), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

The first governs a party who appeared late in the process by not showing up to a hearing that was already scheduled (a live appeal, already timely filed); the second governs whether new evidence can be considered on reconsideration. Neither text reaches back to excuse an appeal filed after the 45-calendar-day window in § 268.101, subd. 2(f) has closed. Law, and the absence itself is a factual reading of the text, not an inference — no good-cause clause modifies subd. 1a(c).

NOT FOUND IN PRIMARY SOURCE: any other subdivision of §§ 268.101, 268.103, or 268.105 in this corpus that supplies a good-cause, excusable-neglect, or similar override for a late-filed appeal from a determination.

C. Hearing

C1. Format (phone / video / in person) — set by rule, by statute, or only by practice?

Both the statute and the rule commit the choice of hearing method to the chief unemployment law judge's discretion, but neither names telephone, video, or in-person as the available options. No primary source read for this unit specifies the format itself.

The chief unemployment law judge has discretion regarding the method by which the hearing is conducted. — Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 1(c), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

The chief unemployment law judge has discretion regarding the method by which the hearing is conducted.

— Minn. R. 3310.2921, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/3310.2921/

The notice-of-hearing rule confirms the method is decided case-by-case and disclosed to the parties in the notice, rather than fixed by rule:

The chief unemployment law judge must send a notice of hearing, by mail or electronic transmission, to each party at least ten calendar days before the scheduled date of hearing unless notice is waived by the parties. The notice must state the time, date, method by which the hearing will be conducted, and issues to be considered at the hearing.

— Minn. R. 3310.2905, subp. 2, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/3310.2905/

Law, as to who decides the method (the chief unemployment law judge, case by case). NOT FOUND IN PRIMARY SOURCE: any rule or statute text naming telephone, video, or in-person hearings as the available formats, or stating a default among them.

Practice: not established from this corpus. The two agency pages supplied (uimn_index.txt, an applicant landing page, and deed_ulj.txt) contain no description of hearing format; deed_ulj.txt returned only a bot-detection CAPTCHA page with no substantive content. This page therefore does not say whether hearings are held mostly by phone in practice — that would need a different agency page (see NOTES FOR MAIN LOOP).

C2. Who presides

A single unemployment law judge, an attorney employed by the department, presides at the hearing; a chief unemployment law judge (also an attorney employee) assigns the case.

Only employees of the department who are attorneys licensed to practice law in Minnesota may serve as the chief unemployment law judge, senior unemployment law judges who are supervisors, or unemployment law judges. The commissioner must designate a chief unemployment law judge. — Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 1b(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

The chief unemployment law judge must assign an unemployment law judge to conduct a hearing and may transfer to another judge any proceedings pending before an unemployment law judge.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 1b(b), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

Law. The statute's and the rules' own title for this official is "unemployment law judge" (the department-wide supervisory title is "chief unemployment law judge"); no source read uses "referee" or "hearing officer," so this page does not either.

C3. Recorded? Evidentiary or on-the-record?

Recorded — yes, by statute and rule. Evidentiary — yes: this is a de novo hearing at which testimony and other evidence are taken, not a paper review of an existing record. These are answered separately because they are separate questions.

Recorded:

All testimony at any hearing must be recorded. — Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 5(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

The unemployment law judge must make a recording of all testimony that is the official record. No other voice recordings or pictures may be made of any party, representative, or witness during the hearing.

— Minn. R. 3310.2917, subp. 2, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/3310.2917/

Evidentiary, not record review:

"Hearing" means the evidentiary hearing authorized under Minnesota Statutes, section 268.105, subdivision 1. — Minn. R. 3310.2902, subp. 4b, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/3310.2902/

Upon a timely appeal to a determination having been filed or upon a referral for direct hearing under section 268.101, subdivision 3a, the chief unemployment law judge must set a time and date for a de novo due process hearing and send notice to any applicant and any employer, by mail or electronic transmission, not less than ten calendar days before the date of the hearing.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 1(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

The notice-of-hearing rule states plainly that this is the only stage at which evidence is taken, and that what comes after is a review of that evidence rather than a new fact-finding proceeding:

a statement that the purpose of the hearing is to take sworn testimony and other evidence on the issues involved, that the hearing is the only procedure available under the law at which a party may present evidence, and that further appeals consist of a review of the evidence submitted at the hearing;

— Minn. R. 3310.2905, subp. 2(A), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/3310.2905/

Consistent with that, the statute bars new evidence at the next stage (request for reconsideration) except to decide whether to reopen the hearing itself:

In deciding a request for reconsideration, the unemployment law judge must not consider any evidence that was not submitted at the hearing, except for purposes of determining whether to order an additional hearing.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 2(c), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

Law. The hearing that Section C describes is evidentiary: sworn testimony, exhibits, cross-examination (see 3310.2921, quoted at C4/D1 context), and a preponderance-of-the-evidence standard. The stage above it is confined to the record made at the hearing.

C4. Subpoenas available to a claimant, and how obtained

Available. A subpoena may issue on the unemployment law judge's own motion, or on written application by any party — which includes an applicant (claimant) — filed with the chief unemployment law judge far enough ahead of the hearing to allow service.

"Party" means any applicant or employer whose legal rights, duties, or privileges will be directly determined in a hearing. — Minn. R. 3310.2902, subp. 5, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/3310.2902/

The unemployment law judge may issue subpoenas to compel the attendance of witnesses, the production of documents or other exhibits, upon a showing of necessity by the requesting party. Requests for issuance of subpoenas must be made to the chief unemployment law judge, by electronic transmission or mail, sufficiently in advance of the scheduled hearing to allow for the service of the subpoenas. The requesting party must identify the person or documents to be subpoenaed, the subject matter of the evidence requested, and their necessity. A request for a subpoena may be denied if the testimony or documents sought would be irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly cumulative or repetitious.

— Minn. R. 3310.2914, subp. 1, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/3310.2914/

A denied request is not final — the judge must revisit it at the hearing itself:

If a request for a subpoena has been denied, the unemployment law judge must reconsider the request during the hearing and determine whether the request was properly denied. If the unemployment law judge determines that the request for a subpoena was not properly denied, the judge must continue the hearing to allow for service of and compliance with the subpoena. — Minn. R. 3310.2914, subp. 1, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/3310.2914/

The unemployment law judge may issue a subpoena even if a party has not requested one.

— Minn. R. 3310.2914, subp. 1, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/3310.2914/

The notice of hearing must tell parties this option exists:

a statement that subpoenas may be available to compel the participation of witnesses or the production of documents, and an explanation of the process for requesting a subpoena;

— Minn. R. 3310.2905, subp. 2(F), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/3310.2905/

Law. NOT FOUND IN PRIMARY SOURCE: any filing fee, form number, or a fixed number of calendar days before the hearing by which a subpoena request must be submitted (contrast the five-calendar-day deadlines set for interpreter requests and exhibit submission elsewhere in this chapter) — 3310.2914, subp. 1 says only "sufficiently in advance." Also not found: any witness-fee provision for a subpoenaed witness in this chapter (contrast Minn. Stat. § 268.105 generally, which does not appear to address witness fees in the sections read).

D. Representation

D1. Attorney and non-attorney representation — allowed, restricted?

Both allowed for the applicant and for the employer. Non-attorney representatives may not charge the applicant any fee; attorneys are the sole exception to that bar. A representative can be excluded from a hearing for misconduct.

In a hearing before an unemployment law judge, a party may be self-represented or represented by an attorney or an authorized representative. Except for an attorney-at-law, no person may charge an applicant a fee of any kind. — Minn. R. 3310.2916, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/3310.2916/

An unemployment law judge may refuse to allow a person to represent others in a hearing if that person acts in an unethical manner or repeatedly fails to follow the instructions of the judge.

— Minn. R. 3310.2916, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/rules/3310.2916/

The statute states the same allowance for both sides and the same fee bar in near-identical terms:

In any proceeding under subdivision 1 or 2, an applicant or employer may be represented by any authorized representative. — Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 6(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

Except for services provided by an attorney-at-law, no person may charge an applicant a fee of any kind for advising, assisting, or representing an applicant in a hearing, on reconsideration, or in a proceeding under subdivision 7.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 6(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

Law. Read precisely: the statute allows "an applicant or employer" to be represented by "any authorized representative" — attorney or not — with no qualification found narrowing who counts as an authorized representative for either side. The fee-charging bar, however, is textually scoped to representation of "an applicant" only; neither 3310.2916 nor § 268.105, subd. 6(a) states a comparable fee restriction for a person representing an employer. NOT FOUND IN PRIMARY SOURCE: any statement that non-attorney representation of an employer is fee-restricted, licensed, or otherwise regulated.

D2. Fee regulation — cap, approval requirement, or none

This field has two different questions, kept separate below: what a representative may charge the person represented, and what the state (department, unemployment law judge, or the courts) may charge a party for the proceeding itself. A third, distinct provision covers what an employer must pay when the employer is the one petitioning for judicial review.

(1) What a representative may charge — applicant side: a categorical bar on non-attorneys, not a dollar cap. Quoted above (3310.2916; § 268.105, subd. 6(a)): except for "an attorney-at-law" / "services provided by an attorney-at-law," no person may charge an applicant any fee. NOT FOUND IN PRIMARY SOURCE: any dollar cap, percentage cap, or approval requirement on what an attorney may charge an applicant for this representation — the sources read state only the categorical bar on non-attorneys and the attorney exception to it, with no figure or approval mechanism attached to the attorney's fee.

(1a) Employer side: as noted at D1, no fee restriction on an employer's representative (attorney or not) was found in the sources read.

(2) What the state may charge a party for the proceeding — applicant exempted; department cannot be charged.

An applicant may not be charged fees, costs, or disbursements of any kind in a proceeding before an unemployment law judge, the Minnesota Court of Appeals, or the Supreme Court of Minnesota. — Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 6(b), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

No attorney fees may be awarded, or costs or disbursements assessed, against the department as a result of any proceedings under this section.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 6(c), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

Law. Subdivision 6(b) is an exemption running to the applicant specifically (no fees, costs, or disbursements of any kind, through all three listed tribunals); subdivision 6(c) is a separate, one-directional bar on assessing attorney fees, costs, or disbursements against the department. Neither subsection states what an employer may be charged as a party to the proceeding itself (as opposed to what an employer must pay to petition for judicial review, covered next).

(3) What an employer must pay to petition for judicial review — distinct from (2), and not to be merged with it.

Any employer petitioning for a writ of certiorari must pay to the court the required filing fee in accordance with the Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure. If the employer requests a written transcript of the testimony received at the hearing conducted under subdivision 1, the employer must pay to the department the cost of preparing the transcript. That money is credited to the administration account.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 7(b), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

The applicant side of the same judicial-review provision is the opposite:

No filing fee or cost bond is required of an applicant petitioning the Minnesota Court of Appeals for a writ of certiorari.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 7(c), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

Law. So: a claimant is shielded from proceeding fees and representative fees (except an attorney's, which is unregulated in amount on this text) throughout the administrative hearing, reconsideration, and both levels of court; an employer petitioning for judicial review must pay the court's filing fee and, if it wants a transcript, the department's cost of preparing one. These are stated as separate rules for separate situations and are not merged here.

E. Benefits pending appeal

E1. Paid while an appeal is pending? — two separate questions

(i) A denied claimant, appealing the claimant's own denial. NOT FOUND IN PRIMARY SOURCE. No section read states directly whether a claimant who has been denied benefits is paid while that claimant's own appeal (to the unemployment law judge, on reconsideration, or on certiorari) is pending.

Inference, flagged as such: Payment is conditioned on eligibility, not on the pendency of an appeal:

The commissioner must pay unemployment benefits from the trust fund to an applicant who has met each of the following requirements: (1) the applicant has filed an application for unemployment benefits and established a benefit account in accordance with section 268.07; (2) the applicant has not been held ineligible for unemployment benefits under section 268.095 because of a quit or discharge; (3) the applicant has met all of the ongoing eligibility requirements under section 268.085 ...

— Minn. Stat. § 268.069, subd. 1, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.069

Because a determination of ineligibility is the operative ruling on whether the applicant "has ... been held ineligible," the structural reading is that a denied claimant is not paid while the claimant's own appeal of that denial is pending — only a reversal changes the payment obligation. This is inference from the shape of § 268.069, not a found sentence. The corpus's only express pay-regardless-of-appeal rule (quoted below in (ii)) covers the reverse situation only — an allowing ruling under employer appeal — which supports, but does not prove, the inference.

(ii) An allowed claimant, while the employer's appeal is pending. Found and stated twice, at two different procedural stages — the determination stage and the ULJ-decision stage:

If a determination or amended determination allows unemployment benefits to an applicant, the unemployment benefits must be paid regardless of any appeal period or any appeal having been filed. — Minn. Stat. § 268.101, subd. 5, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.101

If an unemployment law judge's decision allows unemployment benefits to an applicant, the benefits must be paid regardless of any request for reconsideration or petition to the Minnesota Court of Appeals.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 3a(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

Law. Read together, these two provisions mean an allowed claimant is paid continuously from the first allowing determination onward — through an employer's appeal to the ULJ, a request for reconsideration, and a certiorari petition — with no point at which an employer's appeal suspends payment.

E2. Overpayment on reversal; repayment; interest; and no waiver found

Reversal creates an overpayment, stated identically at both procedural stages.

If an unemployment law judge's decision modifies or reverses a determination that allowed unemployment benefits, or on reconsideration the decision modifies or reverses a prior decision that allowed benefits, any benefits paid are an overpayment of those benefits. A decision that results in an overpayment of unemployment benefits must set out the amount of the overpayment and the requirement under section 268.18, subdivision 1, that the benefits must be repaid.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 3a(b), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

Repayment obligation (ordinary overpayment — not misrepresentation).

Any applicant who (1) because of a determination or amended determination issued under section 268.07 or 268.101, or any other section of this chapter, or (2) because of an unemployment law judge's decision under section 268.105, has received any unemployment benefits that the applicant was held not entitled to, is overpaid the benefits, and must promptly repay the benefits to the trust fund.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.18, subd. 1(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.18

Ordinary overpayment — no interest found; offset capped; eventually canceled. The interest subdivision (quoted below) is textually limited to misrepresentation; no interest provision was found for an ordinary overpayment. It may instead be recovered by offset from future benefits, capped at 50%:

The commissioner may offset from any future unemployment benefits otherwise payable the amount of a nonmisrepresentation overpayment. Except when the nonmisrepresentation overpayment resulted because the applicant failed to report deductible earnings or deductible or benefit delaying payments, no single offset may exceed 50 percent of the amount of the payment from which the offset is made. — Minn. Stat. § 268.18, subd. 3a(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.18

If unemployment benefits overpaid for reasons other than misrepresentation are not repaid or offset from subsequent benefits within six years after the date of the determination or decision holding the applicant overpaid, the commissioner must cancel the overpayment balance, and no administrative or legal proceedings may be used to enforce collection of those amounts.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.18, subd. 4(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.18

Misrepresentation overpayment — a distinct penalty, distinct interest, distinct (longer) cancellation clock. A separate track from an ordinary reversal-driven overpayment, triggered by a false statement made without good-faith belief in its correctness, carrying a 40% penalty:

An applicant has committed misrepresentation if the applicant is overpaid unemployment benefits by making a false statement or representation without a good faith belief as to the correctness of the statement or representation. After the discovery of facts indicating misrepresentation, the commissioner must issue a determination of overpayment penalty assessing a penalty equal to 40 percent of the amount overpaid. — Minn. Stat. § 268.18, subd. 2(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.18

Unless the applicant files an appeal within 45 calendar days after the sending of a determination of overpayment penalty to the applicant by mail or electronic transmission, the determination is final. Proceedings on the appeal are conducted in accordance with section 268.105.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.18, subd. 2(b), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.18

Interest applies only to the misrepresentation track:

On any unemployment benefits obtained by misrepresentation, and any penalty amounts assessed under subdivision 2, the commissioner must assess interest on any amount that remains unpaid beginning 30 calendar days after the date of a determination of overpayment penalty. Interest is assessed at the rate of one percent per month or any part of a month.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.18, subd. 2b, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.18

And its cancellation clock is longer than the ordinary track's six years:

If unemployment benefits overpaid because of misrepresentation including penalties and interest are not repaid within ten years after the date of the determination of overpayment penalty, the commissioner must cancel the overpayment balance and any penalties and interest due ...

— Minn. Stat. § 268.18, subd. 4(b), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.18

No discretionary waiver found; the commissioner may not compromise. No "good cause" or "equity and good conscience" waiver provision was found. Instead there is a bar on compromise and a narrow death/bankruptcy cancellation power:

The commissioner may not compromise the amount of any overpaid unemployment benefits including penalties and interest. — Minn. Stat. § 268.18, subd. 6(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.18

The commissioner may cancel at any time any overpayment, including penalties and interest, that the commissioner determines is uncollectible because of death or bankruptcy.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.18, subd. 4(c), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.18

A pending appeal does not pause collection or interest on an overpayment already determined.

A pending appeal under section 268.105 does not suspend the assessment of interest, penalties, or collection of an overpayment.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.18, subd. 6(d), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.18

This subdivision governs an appeal of the overpayment determination itself (e.g., an appeal under § 268.18, subd. 2(b)); it does not speak to whether the underlying benefits eligibility appeal (E1) suspends anything, and is not read as answering E1.

F. Above the first level

F1. Second level — reconsideration by the same judge, not a separate body

Minnesota does not add a second decision-making body between the hearing and the courts. The "request for reconsideration" is decided by the same judge who issued the decision under review, with narrow exceptions:

A request for reconsideration must be decided by the unemployment law judge who issued the decision under subdivision 1a unless that judge: (1) is no longer employed by the department; (2) is on an extended or indefinite leave; or (3) has been removed from the proceedings by the chief unemployment law judge.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 2(e), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

Deadline. 45 calendar days, running from the sending of the decision:

Any party, or the commissioner, may within 45 calendar days of the sending of the unemployment law judge's decision under subdivision 1a, file a request for reconsideration asking the judge to reconsider that decision.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 2(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

On-the-record, not de novo. Reconsideration is confined to the hearing record, with a narrow, good-cause-gated exception for new evidence going to an additional hearing (not to the reconsideration decision itself):

In deciding a request for reconsideration, the unemployment law judge must not consider any evidence that was not submitted at the hearing, except for purposes of determining whether to order an additional hearing.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 2(c), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

By contrast, the first-level hearing itself is expressly "de novo": "the chief unemployment law judge must set a time and date for a de novo due process hearing" (§ 268.105, subd. 1(a)) — reconsideration is not described in that language anywhere in this section. Law.

F2. Is reconsideration required to exhaust administrative remedies before court?

Yes, on two independent textual grounds. First, the statute uses the word "exhaust" directly, in the context of a party who skipped the hearing:

By failing to participate, the appealing party is considered to have failed to exhaust available administrative remedies unless the appealing party files a request for reconsideration under subdivision 2 and establishes good cause for failing to participate in the hearing.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 1a(b), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

Second, and more generally, the judicial-review subdivision defines what the Court of Appeals reviews as the reconsideration decision, not the original hearing decision:

The Minnesota Court of Appeals must, by writ of certiorari to the department, review the unemployment law judge's decision on reconsideration ...

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 7(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

And subd. 2(f)'s closing sentence makes reconsideration the gate to finality-with-court-option: a decision on reconsideration "is the final decision on the matter and is binding on the parties unless judicial review is sought under subdivision 7." Since subd. 7(a)'s certiorari clock runs from the sending of "the decision on reconsideration," a party has no reconsideration decision to attach a timely petition to without going through subd. 2. Law, from the plain text of subd. 7(a) read with subd. 1a(b) and subd. 2(f); no single sentence states in so many words "reconsideration is a precondition to judicial review," but these provisions establish it structurally, with "exhaust" used once, in the participation-default context.

F3. Judicial review — Court of Appeals, writ of certiorari, 45 days (+3 if mailed)

Court and mechanism.

The Minnesota Court of Appeals must, by writ of certiorari to the department, review the unemployment law judge's decision on reconsideration, provided a petition for the writ is filed with the court and a copy is served upon the unemployment law judge or the commissioner and any other party within 45 calendar days of the sending of the unemployment law judge's decision on reconsideration under subdivision 2. Three days are added to the 45-calendar-day period if the decision on reconsideration was mailed to the parties.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 7(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

The three-added-days rule attaches only to this deadline — the certiorari-petition period running from the sending of the reconsideration decision. It is not stated for the 45-day deadline to appeal a determination (§ 268.101, subd. 2(f)) or the 45-day deadline to request reconsideration (§ 268.105, subd. 2(a)); both of those run from "sending" with no mail-add-on found. The Court of Appeals' jurisdiction is confirmed separately in the judiciary chapter:

The court of appeals shall have jurisdiction to review decisions of the commissioner of employment and economic development, pursuant to section 268.105.

— Minn. Stat. § 480A.06, subd. 3, https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/480A.06

Standard of review.

The Minnesota Court of Appeals may affirm the decision of the unemployment law judge or remand the case for further proceedings; or it may reverse or modify the decision if the substantial rights of the petitioner may have been prejudiced because the findings, inferences, conclusion, or decision are: (1) in violation of constitutional provisions; (2) in excess of the statutory authority or jurisdiction of the department; (3) made upon unlawful procedure; (4) affected by other error of law; (5) unsupported by substantial evidence in view of the hearing record as submitted; or (6) arbitrary or capricious.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 7(d), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

Law.

G. Employer side

Same chain, same deadlines — with fee and filing-method asymmetries. § 268.105 is party- neutral throughout: the hearing is triggered by an appeal from "any applicant and any employer" (subd. 1(a)); reconsideration may be requested by "any party" (subd. 2(a)); representation is available to "an applicant or employer" alike (subd. 6(a)); and judicial review runs from "the sending of the unemployment law judge's decision on reconsideration" with no party-specific variant (subd. 7(a)). No separate employer deadline is stated anywhere in this section. Law.

Asymmetry 1 — certiorari filing fee and transcript cost fall on the employer only.

Any employer petitioning for a writ of certiorari must pay to the court the required filing fee in accordance with the Rules of Civil Appellate Procedure. If the employer requests a written transcript of the testimony received at the hearing conducted under subdivision 1, the employer must pay to the department the cost of preparing the transcript. That money is credited to the administration account.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 7(b), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

By contrast, an applicant petitioning for the same writ pays no filing fee and receives a transcript at no cost:

Upon issuance by the Minnesota Court of Appeals of a writ of certiorari as a result of an applicant's petition, the department must furnish to the applicant at no cost a written transcript of any testimony received at the hearing conducted under subdivision 1, and, if requested, a copy of all exhibits entered into evidence. No filing fee or cost bond is required of an applicant petitioning the Minnesota Court of Appeals for a writ of certiorari.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.105, subd. 7(c), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.105

Asymmetry 2 — an employer's agent must file online; the applicant is guaranteed a mail option.

If an agent files an appeal on behalf of an employer, the appeal must be filed online. The appeal must be filed through the electronic address provided on the determination being appealed. Use of another method of filing does not constitute an appeal. This paragraph does not apply to: (1) an employee filing an appeal on behalf of an employer; or (2) an attorney licensed to practice law who is directly representing the employer on appeal. — Minn. Stat. § 268.103, subd. 2a(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.103

The commissioner must allow an applicant to file an appeal by mail even if an appeal by electronic transmission is allowed.

— Minn. Stat. § 268.103, subd. 2(a), https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/268.103

Law, subd. 1(d) of § 268.103 makes the electronic-transmission-filing rules of that section (including subd. 2a) apply to requests for reconsideration under § 268.105, subd. 2 as well, so this online-only rule for employer-agents is not confined to the first-level appeal.

Open questions this unit does not resolve

Sources

Minnesota Statutes 2025, read as published by the Office of the Revisor of Statutes at revisor.mn.gov. The edition is recorded because it matters: each section page is headed "2025 Minnesota Statutes" and carries a Recent History block listing its amendments, and § 268.105 has been amended in every one of 2014, 2015, 2017, 2019, and 2023.

Minnesota Rules chapter 3310, "Unemployment Appeals," read from the same official Revisor site — Minnesota is the first state covered here whose statutes and administrative rules are both published in static form by one office. Most of the chapter is repealed: of the parts listed in its table of parts, only 3310.2901 through 3310.2924 remain in force, the rest struck by 13 SR 1057 and 22 SR 950. Every part cited below was checked against that table before use.

No agency practice page was read for this unit. mn.gov/deed returned a bot-detection challenge page rather than content, and on uimn.org the applicant landing page carries nothing about appeals while every appeals path tried returned HTTP 404. Where other units in this reference cite an agency page as evidence of practice, this one answers "not found" instead. Minnesota is the third such state here, after Massachusetts and Arizona.

Scope note

This page describes how a procedure works. It is not legal advice, and it does not tell any particular person what to do about their own case. Deadlines and rules change, and an error here would be invisible to you — check anything you intend to rely on against the cited source and against the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development and its unemployment law judges directly. The verified-on date at the top is the date the citations were last read.

Compiled by an AI system running an autonomy experiment, without human review.