It costs $310 to file a civil lawsuit in a Minnesota district court. It costs the other side $310 to file an answer. Minn. Stat. § 357.021, subd. 2(1). Divorce is $340 each. Conciliation court is $65. § 357.022. On top of the district and conciliation court fees, the court administrator also collects a county law library fee, in an amount the county’s law library trustees set. Minn. Stat. §§ 134A.09, subds. 1, 3; 134A.10, subds. 1, 4. An appeal is $550 more. Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 103.01, subd. 1.
For a lot of people, that’s the end of the conversation. It shouldn’t be. Minnesota has a court fee waiver statute, Minn. Stat. § 563.01, and it does a lot more than skip the filing fee. If the court grants it, the sheriff serves your papers for free. The state can pay your witnesses, including an expert, and the cost of depositions and transcripts. On appeal it pays for the record and for printing your brief. You get a free copy of your own court file.
It also has two places where it stops, and they matter as much as the fee. It doesn’t protect you from the other side’s costs if you lose. And if you win money, the state gets paid back first.
Who qualifies?
The statute starts with an affidavit. A court “may authorize the commencement or defense of any civil action, or appeal therein, without payment of fees, costs, and security for costs by a natural person who makes affidavit stating”:
(1) the nature of the action, defense or appeal, (2) a belief that affiant is entitled to redress, and (3) that affiant is financially unable to pay the fees, costs and security for costs.
— Minn. Stat. § 563.01, subd. 3(a)
“Natural person” means you, not your LLC. A company can’t use this statute.
Then the part that matters. That opening sentence says “may”. The next one says “shall”:
Upon a finding by the court that the action, defense, or appeal is not of a frivolous nature, the court shall allow the person to proceed without payment of fees, costs, and security for costs if the affidavit is substantially in the language required by this subdivision and is not found by the court to be untrue.
— Minn. Stat. § 563.01, subd. 3(b) (emphasis added)
So if your case isn’t frivolous, your affidavit tracks the statute, and the court doesn’t find it untrue, the waiver isn’t a favor. It’s required. The Court of Appeals read it that way in 2019: the statute “mandates waiver if the underlying civil action is not frivolous and the supporting affidavit contains certain language that is not found to be untrue.” State v. Scheffler, 932 N.W.2d 57, 62 (Minn. Ct. App. 2019).
The same paragraph lists people who are presumed to qualify. They “include, but are not limited to,” a person “who is receiving public assistance described in section 550.37, subdivision 14,” a person “represented by an attorney on behalf of a civil legal services program or a volunteer attorney program based on indigency,” or a person “who has an annual income not greater than 125 percent of the poverty line” under 42 U.S.C. § 9902(2). § 563.01, subd. 3(b). The public-assistance list in § 550.37 is long. It includes, among others, the Minnesota family investment program, Supplemental Security Income, medical assistance, MinnesotaCare, general assistance, energy or fuel assistance, and SNAP. § 550.37, subd. 14.
What’s 125 percent of the poverty line? The federal guideline for 2026 in the 48 contiguous states, effective January 13, 2026, is $15,960 for a household of one and $33,000 for a household of four. 91 Fed. Reg. 1797 (Jan. 15, 2026). By my math, 125 percent of that is $19,950 for one person and $41,250 for four. Those are presumptions, not ceilings. On my reading, “[b]ut are not limited to” means a person over the line can still show they can’t pay.
What did the Legislature change in 2024?
Two things, and one of them is easy to miss.
It dropped the Latin. Until 2024 the section was titled “IN FORMA PAUPERIS PROCEEDINGS”, and the statute let a court authorize a case without “prepayment” of fees. A 2024 omnibus bill renamed it “COURT FEE WAIVER”, changed “prepayment” to “payment”, and replaced every “in forma pauperis” in the section with plain English. 2024 Minn. Laws ch. 123, art. 15, § 14. That section carries no effective-date clause of its own. The bill also carried appropriations, and for “an act having appropriation items” the default effective date is “the first day of July next following its final enactment”. Minn. Stat. § 645.02. The bill was signed May 24, 2024, which puts the change at July 1, 2024.
The change you might miss is one word. The old text said “[p]ersons meeting the requirements of this subdivision include” the listed groups. The new text says “[p]ersons presumed to meet the requirements”. On my reading, a presumption is where the court starts. It isn’t necessarily where the court has to end.
The 2024 bill also added a shortcut for legal aid clients. A person represented “by a civil legal services program or a volunteer attorney program based on indigency may be allowed to proceed without payment of fees, costs, and security for costs without additional findings” if the lawyer submits an affidavit, or says so on the record, that those services are being provided. § 563.01, subd. 3(d).
And the Latin didn’t go quietly. The very next section, § 563.02, which sets extra requirements for prison inmates, still talks about proceeding “in forma pauperis”. It even still says an inmate with no funds “satisfies the requirement of section 563.01, subdivision 3, clause (c).” The 2024 bill relettered those clauses as (1) through (3). The appellate rule that governs fee waivers on appeal is still titled “Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis”. Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 109. The Legislature cleaned one room. The hallway, and the Supreme Court’s appellate rules, still speak Latin.
What if you’re broke, but not broke enough?
There’s a middle ground, and it’s written into the statute. If the court finds you don’t meet the paragraph (b) criteria “but the court also finds that the party is not able to pay all of the fees, costs, and security for costs, the court may order payment of a fee of $75 or partial payment of the fees, costs, and security for costs”. § 563.01, subd. 3(c).
So the choice isn’t $310 or nothing. It can be $75.
| Your situation | Where it comes from | What the court decides |
|---|---|---|
| Legal aid or a volunteer attorney program represents you | § 563.01, subd. 3(d) | Your lawyer’s affidavit or on-the-record statement may be enough, “without additional findings” |
| You’re on public assistance, or your income is at or under 125% of the poverty line | § 563.01, subd. 3(b) | You’re presumed to qualify; the court still decides frivolousness and whether the affidavit is true |
| You don’t meet those criteria but can’t pay it all | § 563.01, subd. 3(c) | The court may order a $75 fee or a partial payment |
| You’re appealing | Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 109.02 | You move in the trial court, which “shall grant the motion if the court finds that the party is indigent and that the appeal is not frivolous” |
| You’re asking to expunge a criminal record | Minn. Stat. § 609A.03, subd. 1 | A different statute governs, under Scheffler |
It covers far more than the filing fee
This is the part people don’t expect. Once the waiver is granted, the statute keeps going.
Service. “Upon order of the court, the court administrator and the sheriff of any Minnesota county shall perform their duties without charge to the person proceeding with a court fee waiver.” § 563.01, subd. 4. And the court “shall direct payment of the reasonable expense of service of process” by the state “if served by a private process server, if the sheriff is unavailable, or by publication.” Id.; § 563.01, subd. 2. Service is where a lot goes wrong, as I wrote in why a Minnesota lawsuit starts with service, not filing.
Witnesses, including experts. If the court finds a witness “has evidence material and necessary to the case and is within the state of Minnesota, the court shall direct payment of the reasonable expenses incurred in subpoenaing the witness, if necessary, and in paying the fees and costs of the witness.” § 563.01, subd. 5. The statute says “including an expert witness” in so many words.
Depositions and transcripts. If a deposition and its transcript “are necessary to adequately prepare, present or decide an issue presented by the action,” the court “shall direct payment of the reasonable expenses”. § 563.01, subd. 6. The same standard covers a transcript of the proceedings. § 563.01, subd. 7.
Your file. The court administrator “shall provide” you “with a copy of the person’s court file without charge.” § 563.01, subd. 7a.
The appeal. The appellate court “shall, upon granting permission to proceed with a court fee waiver”, direct payment of “the reasonable expenses incurred in obtaining the record and reproducing the appellate briefs.” § 563.01, subd. 8. Under the appellate rules, the relief “may include waiver of the filing fee and any cost bond required under Rule 107 or Rule 116, and payment of costs for the transcript and reproducing briefs.” Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 109.01. And whoever pays is spelled out in subdivision 2: “the expenses shall be paid by the state.”
Notice the condition on the expensive items. Witnesses, depositions, and transcripts all turn on a finding that they’re necessary. You have to ask, and you have to show it.
The Minnesota Supreme Court made that point in June 1981. A woman who said she’d been held at a Duluth hospital over her objection sued, along with her husband, through a legal aid lawyer. They asked the court to order the county to cover $2,000 for an expert psychiatrist and the cost of depositions. (Today the statute says the state pays. § 563.01, subd. 2.) The trial court said no, and noted it “was surprised that a fee-generating case was being handled by Legal Aid.” The Supreme Court reversed. “[T]he fact that this case may generate fees cannot be a basis for denying payment of legal expenses under the IFP statute”, and clients of legal aid “as well as those of a private law firm, may seek IFP status despite the fact that they are being represented on a contingent-fee basis.” Thompson v. St. Mary’s Hospital of Duluth, 306 N.W.2d 560, 562 (Minn. 1981). But the court also said the trial court “has broad discretion in determining whether expenses should be paid”, and it sent the case back for findings on whether the expert and the depositions were “in fact, necessary”. Id. at 563.
Your lawyer taking the case on contingency doesn’t knock you out. Failing to show the expense is necessary can.
Can a court say no?
Yes, and two published decisions show the two ways it happens.
The first is frivolousness. In 1987, a man appealing a general-assistance overpayment asked to proceed without fees on appeal. The trial court found he was indigent and couldn’t pay, but that his appeal was frivolous, and the Court of Appeals affirmed. Maddox v. Department of Human Services, 400 N.W.2d 136, 139–40 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). The standard is narrower than it sounds. A frivolous claim is one “without any reasonable basis in law or equity and could not be supported by a good faith argument for [a] * * * modification or reversal of existing law.” Id. at 139 (quotation omitted). And the court went out of its way to add that “the trial courts need not find that the appellant will prevail, because only a finding that the appeal is not frivolous is needed to obtain relief.” Id. at 139 n.1. A weak case isn’t a frivolous one.
The second is a court that just gets it wrong. In 2019, a man asked to waive the fee on a petition to expunge a petty misdemeanor seatbelt conviction. He submitted proof that he was receiving medical assistance and energy assistance, both on the § 550.37 list. The district court denied the request on a form order, checking a box that said he was “not found to be indigent”. The Court of Appeals reversed: the finding that he wasn’t indigent was erroneous. Scheffler, 932 N.W.2d at 60–61, 63. There’s a twist, though. Expungement petitions have their own fee-waiver sentence, so the court held the decision “is governed by Minn. Stat. § 609A.03, subd. 1, and not by Minn. Stat. § 563.01, subd. 3.” Id. at 62. That statute says the expungement filing fee “may be waived in cases of indigency” and “shall be waived” in one listed category. Minn. Stat. § 609A.03, subd. 1. I covered the rest of that statute in Minnesota criminal expungement after Clean Slate.
On the standard of review, both courts used abuse of discretion. Scheffler, 932 N.W.2d at 60; Maddox, 400 N.W.2d at 139.
What about conciliation court?
Conciliation court has its own waiver, and it’s simpler. The conciliation statute tells the Supreme Court that its rules “shall provide for commencement of an action without payment of fees when a litigant who is a natural person claims an inability to pay the fees”. Minn. Stat. § 491A.02, subd. 3. The rule, as amended effective July 1, 2026, does exactly that: “If any party who is a natural person signs and files with the court administrator an affidavit claiming an inability to pay the applicable fees, no fees are required.” Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 506. The rule’s words don’t ask for a frivolousness finding or a presumption category. You swear you can’t pay, and you’re in, as long as you’re a person and not a company.
The catch is the one you’d expect by now. If you win, “the amount of the fees which would have been payable by the affiant must be included in the order for judgment and paid to the administrator of conciliation court by the affiant out of any money recovered by the affiant on the judgment.” Id.; see § 491A.02, subd. 3.
For everything past the filing fee, the conciliation rules send you back to § 563.01. A party who can’t pay to have the summons served on an out-of-state defendant “may apply for permission to proceed without payment of fees pursuant to the procedure set forth in Minnesota Statutes, section 563.01.” Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 508(a)(3). The subpoena rule has the same sentence, though its text says “issuance and service of a summons” in a rule about subpoenas. Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 512(a). So does the removal rule, for a party who can’t pay the fee to remove the case to district court. Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 521(b)(4). And if you remove and lose, the court awards the other side an extra $50 in costs, but “[i]f the removing party is eligible to proceed under Minnesota Statutes, section 563.01, the $50 in costs may be waived if the court determines that a hardship exists and that the case was removed in good faith.” Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 524(b). I walked through how conciliation court and removal work in the conciliation court guide.
The two places it stops
It doesn’t protect you if you lose. A fee waiver covers your fees. It doesn’t cover the other side’s. Minnesota says the prevailing party “shall be allowed reasonable disbursements paid or incurred”. Minn. Stat. § 549.04, subd. 1. In 2014 the Minnesota Supreme Court held that a court can trim the amount to what’s reasonable, but “it does not have discretion to relieve the non-prevailing party of its obligation to pay those costs and disbursements.” Dukowitz v. Hannon Security Services, 841 N.W.2d 147, 155 (Minn. 2014). The plaintiff there had proceeded without fees. She still owed $1,361.35. Id. at 149. Even the dissent agreed with that part. Id. at 156. And the fee-waiver statute says so itself: “Judgment may be rendered for costs at the conclusion of the action as in other cases.” § 563.01, subd. 10.
Who pays whose lawyer is a separate question, and I mapped it in the fee-shifting map. A waiver gets you in the door. It doesn’t insure the trip.
If you win money, the state gets paid back first. Subdivision 10 goes on: if you recover money “by either settlement or judgment”, the costs that were deferred and the expenses the court ordered paid “shall be included in such moneys and shall be paid directly to the court administrator by the opposing party.” § 563.01, subd. 10. Read your settlement with that sentence in mind. But it reaches money you recover, not every dollar a court awards. In 2014 the Court of Appeals held that $200 in statutory costs a tenant was owed when an eviction case against her was dismissed wasn’t a recovery “by either settlement or judgment”, so it didn’t go to the court administrator. HNA Properties v. Moore, 848 N.W.2d 238, 243–44 (Minn. Ct. App. 2014).
The court can also claw it back along the way. It may order reimbursement if the party “no longer meets the eligibility criteria” or can now pay more, § 563.01, subd. 8a, and it may rescind the waiver on motion if “the allegations of poverty contained in the affidavit are untrue,” or if you become able to pay, § 563.01, subd. 9. And don’t shade the affidavit. “A person who fraudulently invokes the privilege of this section shall be guilty of perjury”. § 563.01, subd. 11.
On appeal, the clock matters
The appellate version runs through the trial court. A party who wants a fee waiver in the Court of Appeals files the motion in the trial court, with an affidavit and a copy of the statement of the case; a party bringing the appeal must file it “on or before the date the appeal is commenced”, and the trial court “shall rule on the motion within 14 days after it is filed, unless the Court of Appeals grants additional time.” Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 109.02. If the trial court says no, it has to “state in writing the reasons for the denial”, and you then have 14 days from the filing of the order to either pay the fee, post any required bond, and file the transcript certificate if a transcript is needed, or move the Court of Appeals to review the denial. Id. While a timely motion is pending, the deadlines to pay the filing fee, post a bond, and file the transcript certificate are suspended. Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 109.05.
The comment to the rule says the “not frivolous” showing “does not require a showing that the party is likely to prevail on appeal”. Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 109 advisory comm. cmt. (2000). And if legal aid represents you, the $550 appellate filing fee “shall not be required” at all. Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 103.01, subd. 3(b). The deadlines for the appeal itself are their own minefield, which I covered in Minnesota appeal deadlines.
I wrote earlier this year about the ways the courthouse door is narrowing for ordinary people. Cost is one of them. Section 563.01 is a place where the Legislature propped it back open. You just have to ask.
Madgett Law, LLC
Madgett Law, LLC handles civil litigation in Minnesota courts, from the first evaluation through trial and appeal, and we’ll tell you if a case has stopped making economic sense. More on that work is on our general litigation page. If you’re weighing a lawsuit, or defending one, and the cost of getting into court is the problem, send us a message.
Sources: Minn. Stat. § 357.021, subd. 2(1) ($310 civil filing fee; $340 dissolution); Minn. Stat. § 357.022 ($65 conciliation court fee); Minn. Stat. § 134A.09, subds. 1, 3 (Hennepin and Ramsey law library fees); § 134A.10, subds. 1, 4 (law library fees in other counties); Minn. Stat. § 491A.02, subd. 3 (conciliation fees; rules to allow commencement without fees; repayment from recovery); Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 506 (as amended effective July 1, 2026; affidavit in lieu of fees), 508(a)(3) (out-of-state service), 512(a) (subpoenas), 524(b) ($50 removal costs); Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 103.01, subd. 1 ($550 appellate filing fee), subd. 3(b) (no filing fee for appellant represented by a legal aid society). Minn. Stat. § 563.01, subd. 2 (expenses paid by the state), subd. 3(a) (affidavit; natural person), subd. 3(b) (mandatory waiver on findings; presumed categories; 125 percent of the poverty line; § 563.02 exception), subd. 3(c) ($75 or partial payment), subd. 3(d) (legal services representation), subd. 4 (sheriff and administrator without charge; private process server or publication), subd. 5 (witness and expert fees), subd. 6 (depositions), subd. 7 (transcripts), subd. 7a (copy of court file), subd. 8 (appellate record and briefs), subd. 8a (reimbursement), subd. 9 (rescission), subd. 10 (costs; recovery paid to court administrator), subd. 11 (perjury). 2024 Minn. Laws ch. 123, art. 15, § 14 (renaming and amending § 563.01); Minn. Stat. § 645.02 (July 1 default for an act having appropriation items). Minn. Stat. § 563.02, subds. 1–2 (inmate requirements). Minn. Stat. § 550.37, subd. 14 (government assistance based on need). Annual Update of the HHS Poverty Guidelines, 91 Fed. Reg. 1797 (Jan. 15, 2026). Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 109.01, 109.02, 109.05, and advisory committee comment (2000). Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 521(b)(4) (removal fee; § 563.01 procedure). Minn. Stat. § 609A.03, subd. 1 (expungement filing fee). Minn. Stat. § 549.04, subd. 1 (prevailing party’s disbursements). Thompson v. St. Mary’s Hospital of Duluth, 306 N.W.2d 560, 562–63 (Minn. 1981); Maddox v. Department of Human Services, 400 N.W.2d 136, 139–40 & n.1 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987); State v. Scheffler, 932 N.W.2d 57, 60–63 (Minn. Ct. App. 2019); Dukowitz v. Hannon Security Services, 841 N.W.2d 147, 149, 155–56 (Minn. 2014), aff’g 815 N.W.2d 848 (Minn. Ct. App. 2012); HNA Properties v. Moore, 848 N.W.2d 238, 243–44 (Minn. Ct. App. 2014). This article is general legal information about Minnesota law. It is not legal advice, it does not create an attorney–client relationship, and no particular outcome is promised or implied.