MN · rules
Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 130
Exhibit Numbering
Exhibits proposed by any party shall be marked in a single series of arabic numbers, without designation of the party offering the exhibit. Exhibit numbers may be consecutive or may be preassigned in blocks to each party. If adhesive exhibit labels are used, they shall be white with black printing.
History
(Added effective January 1, 1994.) Advisory Committee Comment - 1994 Amendment This new rule requires a uniform method of marking exhibits, without the cumbersome prefixes that are frequently now encountered. The committee believes that a uniform numbering system will benefit the courts and litigants. The new system will permit exhibits to be used without labeling to show "ownership" or "lineage" of the exhibit. This system will also facilitate numbering of exhibits in multi-party cases, where the current practice creates complicated numbers at trial and burdensome citations on appeal. Attorneys and judges with experience in using this system believe it works fairly, predictably, and efficiently. The rule permits flexibility in assignment of exhibit numbers, allowing them to be issued seriatim at trial or in blocks of numbers assigned to each party prior to trial. The rule requires uniform exhibit labels to prevent any uncertainty or wasted effort by parties attempting to obtain a perceived advantage in identifying "ownership" of exhibits through the color of labels.
Provenance
- Source
- revisor.mn.gov
- Retrieved
- 2026-09-15
- Edition
- 2026-09-14
- Content hash
cc8358ee71afed7ecfec5213334278908624caf371513a3f8b478d0b71fe0a36
The link goes to the issuing authority’s own document — the one we read to produce this record. Where a source publishes whole titles rather than sections, your browser may need a moment to jump to the provision.
Unofficial copy of government-published law, reproduced from official sources with full provenance. Not an official publication; verify against official sources before relying on it in a filing. Records in the 'guidance' corpus, and only that corpus, are sub-regulatory (interpretive guidelines, survey procedures) and are not binding law. Validity bounds follow each jurisdiction's declared temporalBasis.