2025 Session Last amended: 1982 session

§ 14.69 — Scope of Judicial Review

Plain-Language Summary

A court can reverse or modify an agency decision if it violates the constitution, exceeds the agency's authority, was made using unlawful procedures, contains legal errors, is unsupported by substantial evidence, or is arbitrary and capricious. The court can also send the case back for further proceedings.

14.69 SCOPE OF JUDICIAL REVIEW.

In a judicial review under sections 14.63 to 14.68, the court may affirm the decision of the agency or remand the case for further proceedings; or it may reverse or modify the decision if the substantial rights of the petitioners may have been prejudiced because the administrative finding, inferences, conclusion, or decisions are:

(a) in violation of constitutional provisions; or

(b) in excess of the statutory authority or jurisdiction of the agency; or

(d) affected by other error of law; or

(e) unsupported by substantial evidence in view of the entire record as submitted; or

(f) arbitrary or capricious.

History:

1963 c 809 s 2; 1980 c 615 s 22; 1982 c 424 s 130

**NOTE: **The Office of Administrative Hearings has been renamed the Court of Administrative Hearings. This terminology change will be implemented in the 2026 Statutes. Laws 2025, chapter 39, article 2, sections 17 and 68.

History: History: 1963 c 809 s 2; 1980 c 615 s 22; 1982 c 424 s 130

Practical Notes

These six grounds are the basis for challenging any agency decision on judicial review. The most commonly used are that the decision lacks substantial evidence or is arbitrary and capricious. You must show that your substantial rights were prejudiced by one of these defects.

Source: Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes