Advisory Committee Comment-1996 Amendment

This rule is new. It is patterned after the similar new

Minn Gen. R.. Prac. ____ The Task Force believes that the scheduling

information and procedures in family court and other civil matters should be made as uniform as possible, consistent with the special needs in family court matters. It is amended in 1996 to include information needed for using alternative dispute resolution in family law matters as required by Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 301.01(sic), also as amended in 1996. These amendments follow the form of similar provisions in Minn Gen. R.. Prac. 111, and should be interpreted in the same manner.

Matters not scheduled under the procedures of this rule are scheduled by motion practice under Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 303. Rule 304 ‘ now provides a definite time by which informational statements are required, even if a temporary hearing is contemplated and postponed. Under the prior version of the rule, informational statements might never be due because a temporary hearing might be repeatedly postponed. If the parties seek to have a case excluded from the court scheduling process, they may do so by stipulating to having the case placed on “Inactive Status.” This stipulation can be revoked by either party, but removes the case from active court calendar management for up to one year. See Minnesota Conference of Chief Judges (See Exhibit A), Resolution Relating to the Adoption of Uniform Local Rules, Jan. 25, 1991.

This rule provides for a separate Form 9B for use by unrepresented parties. This form contains additional information useful to the court in managing cases where one or both parties are not represented by an attorney. This form is updated in 1996 to request information about any history or claims of domestic abuse and the views of the parties on the use (or potential use) of alternative dispute resolution in the same manner as Form 9A or represented parties.

Advisory Committee Comment-2007 Amendment

Rule 304.05 is a new provision, intended primarily to make it clear that the special scheduling procedures relating to collaborative law in Minn. Gen. R. Pract. 111.05 apply to scheduling of family law matters subject to Rule 304. The rule permits a scheduling order to include provision for collaborative law, but does not require it.

Advisory Committee Comment-2009 Amendment

Rule 304.02 is amended to include section (b)(7) adopted to implement the gathering of information about the potential need for interpreter services in a case, either for witnesses or for a party. See Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 8.13.

.