Last amended July 1, 2005 · Last verified July 1, 2026
In one sentenceRule 47 governs how prospective jurors are questioned before trial, whether a deliberating jury can separate overnight, and when a juror can be excused for good cause.
Full Text of Rule 47
Text size
Rule 47.01. Examination of Jurors
The court may permit the parties or their attorneys to conduct the examination of prospective jurors or may itself conduct the examination. In the latter event, the court shall permit the parties or their attorneys to supplement the examination by such further inquiry as it deems proper. Supplemental juror questionnaires completed by jurors shall not be accessible to the public unless formally admitted into evidence in a publicly accessible hearing or trial
Rule 47.03. Separation of Jury
After the jury has retired for its deliberations, the court, in its discretion, may permit the jury to separate overnight and return to its deliberations the following morning.
Rule 47.04. Excuse
The court may for good cause excuse a juror from service during trial or deliberation.
Advisory Committee Comments
Advisory Committee Comment - 2005 Amendments
The addition of the last sentence in Rule 47.01 precluding public access to completed supplemental juror questionnaires recognizes both the legitimate privacy interests of jurors and the interests of the public in otherwise publicly accessible court proceedings. This rule does not apply to juror qualification questionnaires submitted by jurors in accordance with Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 807; public access to completed qualification questionnaires is governed by Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 814.
Rule 47.02
Advisory Committee Comment - 1998 Amendments
Rule 47.02 is abrogated. Under this amendment, alternate jurors are no longer part of the jury trial process. Rather than seat "alternate" jurors who will, or may, then participate in the deliberations, the rule simply does not provide for two classes of jurors. Jurors who begin the case by being sworn in as jurors continue to the discharge of the jury, unless they are excused for cause as provided for by Rule 47.04. This amendment parallels the abandonment of using alternates in federal court in 1991, and is intended to resolve an ongoing source of dissatisfaction with jury service by jurors. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 47(b), Notes of Advisory Comm. - 1991 Amends., reprinted in Federal Civil Judicial Procedure and Rules 205 (West 1998). Rule 47.04 is new and is identical to Fed.R.Civ.P. 47(c). Although courts presently have the inherent power to excuse jurors even in the absence of a rule, there is no reason to have the federal rule be different from the state rule on this issue. Other than obviating confusion over whether there might be some substantive difference in intent, this amendment is not intended to change the existing practice. See Minnesota Statutes, section 546.13 (1996) (codifying authority to excuse juror).
Amendment History
(Amended effective July 1, 2005.)
(Abrogated effective January 1, 1999.)
(Added effective January 1, 1999.)
Plain-English Summary
Before a jury is seated, prospective jurors are questioned to find out whether they can be fair and impartial. Rule 47 lets the court decide who does that questioning: the judge may allow the parties or their attorneys to question prospective jurors directly, or the judge may conduct the questioning personally. If the judge handles it, the parties still get a chance to ask follow-up questions the judge believes are appropriate. Any supplemental questionnaire a juror fills out during this process stays private unless it is formally admitted into evidence at a public hearing or trial.
Once the jury has retired to deliberate, the rule gives the trial judge discretion to let the jury separate overnight and pick deliberations back up the next morning, instead of requiring the jury to stay together continuously until reaching a verdict. This gives judges flexibility to manage lengthy deliberations without forcing jurors to be sequestered.
The rule also allows a judge to excuse a juror from service during trial or deliberation for good cause. This lets a trial continue to move forward when a juror develops a health problem, a scheduling conflict, or some other legitimate reason that prevents continued service, without automatically requiring a mistrial.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who gets to question potential jurors in a Minnesota civil trial?
The court may let the parties or their attorneys conduct the questioning, or the court may conduct it directly, in which case the parties are still given a chance to ask further questions the court considers proper.
Are juror questionnaires public record?
No, supplemental juror questionnaires are not accessible to the public unless they are formally admitted into evidence in a hearing or trial that is open to the public.
Can a jury go home once it starts deliberating?
Yes, after the jury retires to deliberate, the court has discretion to let the jury separate overnight and resume deliberating the next morning.
Can a juror be removed once the trial has started?
Yes, the court may excuse a juror from service during trial or deliberation for good cause.
Source & verification. The rule text and Advisory Committee Comments are reproduced verbatim from the
official Minnesota Rules of Civil Procedure (Minn. R. Civ. P. 47). Prescribed by the Supreme Court of Minnesota (Minn. Stat. § 480.051). The plain-English summary is original and written by us. Last verified July 1, 2026. ·
Official source
Advisory Committee Comment - 2005 Amendments
The addition of the last sentence in Rule 47.01 precluding public access to completed supplemental juror questionnaires recognizes both the legitimate privacy interests of jurors and the interests of the public in otherwise publicly accessible court proceedings. This rule does not apply to juror qualification questionnaires submitted by jurors in accordance with Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 807; public access to completed qualification questionnaires is governed by Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 814.
Rule 47.02