Minn. Stat. § 566.06

Simmons v. Kemp · 1990 4 citations

Plaintiffs argue that tenants must have the opportunity to discover all relevant documents, records and regulations from the PHA prior to trial. 24 C.F.R. § 966.53(c). Plaintiffs claim that rule 34, which is the Minnesota rule governing discovery, provides too much time to meet the due process standard because it allows up to thirty days for discovery. 4 The plaintiffs contend that unlawful detainer proceedings can be completed within seven days, Minn. Stat. § 566.06, 5 and that therefore, there is no *819 guarantee that discovery will be available for a tenant facing eviction in an unlawful detainer proceeding. 6

Plaintiffs argue that tenants must have the opportunity to discover all relevant documents, records and regulations from the PHA prior to trial. 24 C.F.R. § 966.53(c). Plaintiffs claim that rule 34, which is the Minnesota rule governing discovery, provides too much time to meet the due process standard because it allows up to thirty days for discovery. 4 The plaintiffs contend that unlawful detainer proceedings can be completed within seven days, Minn. Stat. § 566.06, 5 and that therefore, there is no *819 guarantee that discovery will be available for a tenant facing eviction in an unlawful detainer proceeding. 6

Plaintiffs argue that tenants must have the opportunity to discover all relevant documents, records and regulations from the PHA prior to trial. 24 C.F.R. § 966.53(c). Plaintiffs claim that rule 34, which is the Minnesota rule governing discovery, provides too much time to meet the due process standard because it allows up to thirty days for discovery. 4 The plaintiffs contend that unlawful detainer proceedings can be completed within seven days, Minn. Stat. § 566.06, 5 and that therefore, there is no *819 guarantee that discovery will be available for a tenant facing eviction in an unlawful detainer proceeding. 6

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.