Rule 363.Default
Last amended July 1, 2026 · Last verified July 1, 2026
Full Text of Rule 363
Advisory Committee Comments
Advisory Committee Comment--2026 Amendments
Rule 363.01 is amended to reflect a change in statutory citation.
Advisory Committee Comment – 2019 Amendment
Rules 372.05 and 363.02 and .03 are amended in 2019 to harmonize the rules and create a uniform 21-day period for responding to motions for child support.
Advisory Committee Comment – 2023 Amendments
Rule 363.02 is modified in 2023 to require a separate affidavit for each defaulting party, which results in a clear record with separate case events in the court’s case management system.
Advisory Committee Comment – 2019 Amendment
Rules 372.05 and 363.02 and .03 are amended in 2019 to harmonize the rules and create a uniform 21-day period for responding to motions for child support.
Advisory Committee Comment–2008 Amendment
Rule 363.04 is amended to create specific time limits for setting a case on for hearing following receipt of a notice of deficiency in an order proposed by an initiating agency or to serve amended pleadings. The amendment also establishes a specific time limit for responding to an amended pleading that may be served.
Amendment History
- (Amended effective July 1, 2026.)
- (Amended effective November 22, 2023.)
- (Amended effective July 1, 2019.)
- (Amended effective January 1, 2020.)
Plain-English Summary
Rule 363 does one specific job: it says which matters in the expedited process can be resolved when one side does not respond. That list covers actions to establish support, motions to modify or set support, motions to change venue where nobody has timely objected, and proceedings to reinstate a recreational license that was tied to a support obligation.
A default under this rule follows its own timeline. Once every non-initiating party has been properly served and the summons or notice did not itself set a hearing date, the initiating party can proceed by default if 21 days pass with no written answer and no returned request-for-hearing form. From there, the initiating party has 45 days from service to file a proposed default order, and a further 14-day cure period opens if that deadline slips, before the court administrator sets the matter for a hearing instead. Minnesota law also allows suspending a person's recreational license over unpaid support, which is why reinstating one belongs on this same default list.
A party avoids default in the first place by responding within that same 21-day window, either with a written answer or by returning the request-for-hearing form; that is the general mechanism Rule 363 itself provides, not a standing right to demand a hearing after a default order has already been proposed. The magistrate can still reject a proposed default order that is not supported by law, or is not reasonable and fair, in which case a notice of deficiency goes out with options that include setting the matter for a hearing. For a recreational-license reinstatement specifically, an Advisory Committee Comment notes that a party who disagrees with the proposed reinstatement can ask for a hearing rather than letting it happen by default.
Frequently Asked Questions
What kinds of expedited process matters can be resolved by default?
Rule 363 allows a default resolution for actions to establish support, motions to modify or set support, venue changes that nobody has timely objected to, and proceedings to reinstate a recreational license tied to a support obligation.
How does a default happen if the other party never responds?
Once every non-initiating party has been properly served with a summons or notice that did not itself set a hearing date, and 21 days pass with no written answer and no returned request-for-hearing form, the initiating party can prepare a proposed default order. That order, along with a current affidavit of default and an affidavit of non-military status for each non-initiating party, is due within 45 days of service; missing that date triggers a notice giving the initiating party 14 more days to file before the court sets the matter for a hearing instead.
Can I still get a hearing if I disagree with a proposed default order?
The way to get a hearing instead of a default is to respond within 21 days of service, either with a written answer or by returning the request-for-hearing form; Rule 363 does not otherwise give a defaulted party a standing right to demand a hearing after the fact. The one specific exception noted in the drafting history is a recreational-license reinstatement, where a party who disagrees with the proposed reinstatement can ask for a hearing rather than accept it by default.
Does Rule 363 cover contested motions to change venue?
No. It covers venue changes only where a party has failed to object in time; a venue motion that a party disputes is decided by district court, not resolved by default.
What law authorizes suspending and reinstating a recreational license for unpaid support?
Rule 363 ties the reinstatement process to Minnesota Statutes section 518A.68, which is the statute governing reinstatement of a recreational license connected to a support obligation.
Advisory Committee Comment
Rule 363.01 is modified in 2023 to recognize that magistrates can process default proceedings under Rule 353.01 and default proceedings to reinstate a recreational license under Minn. Stat. § 518A.68(c). Reinstatements of a recreational license are required under the statute if the obligor is compliant with a payment agreement or subpoena or the IV-D case is closing. These reinstatements are usually not contested and it wastes court hearing time slots to require these cases on the Ex Pro calendar. A party retains the ability to request a hearing if they disagree with the reinstatement.