Precedential Opinions
Under Minn. Rule of Civil Appellate Procedure 136.01, the Court of Appeals issues a precedential opinion (formerly called "published opinions") only to clarify or develop the law. In deciding whether to issue a precedential opinion, the court considers multiple factors listed in Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 136.01, subd. (1)(b), including whether the case establishes a new principle or rule of law, clarifies existing case law, decides a novel issue involving a constitutional provision, statute, administrative rule or rule of court, or resolves a significant or recurring legal issue. Precedential opinions will be considered and used by courts faced with similar issues in the future, and they are published in books of caselaw found in most law libraries. Under Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 128.02, subd. 1(f), parties may advise the court whether a precedential opinion would be helpful.

Nonprecedential Opinions
Nonprecedential opinions (formerly called "unpublished opinions") are typically issued in cases that do not contain issues of first impression or involve the application of established law to the particular set of facts and circumstances in that case. See Minn. R. Civ. App. 136.01. Nonprecedential opinions "are not binding authority except as law of the case, res judicata or collateral estoppel, but nonprecedential opinions may be cited as persuasive authority." Minn. R. Civ. App. 136.01.

Order Opinions
Order opinions are a simplified format for non-precedential opinions. Cases that involve a few simple issues may be decided by order opinions, which include little discussion of the facts of the case and a brief analysis of the laws that are involved. Order opinions “are not binding authority except as law of the case, res judicata or collateral estoppel.” Minn. R. Civ. App. 136.01.