a Authority for Appointment. Unless a statute provides otherwise, a court may appoint a master only to:
1 perform duties consented to by the parties;
2 hold trial proceedings and make or recommend findings of fact on issues to be decided by the court without a jury if appointment is warranted by
A some exceptional condition, or
B the need to perform an accounting or resolve a difficult computation of damages; or
3 address pretrial and post-trial matters that cannot be addressed effectively and timely by an available district judge.
b Disqualification. A master must not have a relationship to the parties, counsel, action, or court that would require disqualification of a judge, unless the parties consent with the court’s approval to appointment of a particular person after disclosure of any potential grounds for disqualification.
c Expense. In appointing a master, the court must consider the fairness of imposing the likely expenses on the parties and must protect against unreasonable expense or delay.
53.02 Order Appointing Master
a Notice. The court must give the parties notice and an opportunity to be heard before appointing a master. A party may suggest candidates for appointment.
b Contents. The order appointing a master must direct the master to proceed with all reasonable diligence and must state:
1 the master’s duties, including any investigation or enforcement duties, and any limits on the master’s authority under Rule 53.03;
2 the circumstances—if any—in which the master may communicate ex parte with the court or a party;
3 the nature of the materials to be preserved and filed as the record of the master’s activities;
4 the time limits, method of filing the record, other procedures, and standards for reviewing the master’s orders, findings, and recommendations;
5 the basis, terms, and procedure for fixing the master’s compensation under Rule 53.08; and
6 the extent to which, if at all, the parties and the master must use the court’s E-Filing System in the proceedings before the master.
c Entry of Order. The court may enter the order appointing a master only after the master has filed an affidavit disclosing whether there is any ground for disqualification and, if a ground for disqualification is disclosed, after the parties have consented with the court’s approval to waive the disqualification.
d Amendment. The order appointing a master may be amended at any time after notice to the parties and an opportunity to be heard.
53.03 Master’s Authority Unless the appointing order expressly directs otherwise, a master has authority to regulate all proceedings and take all appropriate measures to perform fairly and efficiently the assigned duties. The master may by order impose upon a party any noncontempt sanction provided by Rule 37 or 45, and may recommend a contempt sanction against a party and sanctions against a nonparty.
53.04 Evidentiary Hearings Unless the appointing order expressly directs otherwise, a master conducting an evidentiary hearing may exercise the power of the appointing court to compel, take, and record evidence.
53.05 Master’s Orders A master who makes an order must file the order and promptly serve a copy on each party. The court administrator must enter the order on the docket.
53.06 Master’s Reports A master must report to the court as required by the order of appointment. The master must file the report and promptly serve a copy of the report on each party unless the court directs otherwise.
53.07 Action on Master’s Order, Report, or Recommendations
a Action. In acting on a master’s order, report, or recommendations, the court must afford an opportunity to be heard and may receive evidence, and may: adopt or affirm; modify; wholly or partly reject or reverse; or resubmit to the master with instructions.
b Time To Object or Move. A party may file objections to—or a motion to adopt or modify—the master’s order, report, or recommendations no later than 21 days from the time the master’s order, report, or recommendations are served, unless the court sets a different time.
c Fact Findings. The court must decide de novo all objections to findings of fact made or recommended by a master unless the parties stipulate with the court’s consent that:
1 the master’s findings will be reviewed for clear error, or
2 the findings of a master appointed under Rule 53.01(a)(1) or
3 will be final.
d Legal Conclusions. The court must decide de novo all objections to conclusions of law made or recommended by a master.
e Procedural Matters. Unless the order of appointment establishes a different standard of review, the court may set aside a master’s ruling on a procedural matter only for an abuse of discretion.
a Fixing Compensation. The court must fix the master’s compensation before or after judgment on the basis and terms stated in the order of appointment, but the court may set a new basis and terms after notice and an opportunity to be heard.
b Payment. The compensation fixed under Rule 53.08(a) must be paid either:
1 by a party or parties; or
2 from a fund or subject matter of the action within the court’s control.
c Allocation. The court must allocate payment of the master’s compensation among the parties after considering the nature and amount of the controversy, the means of the parties, and the extent to which any party is more responsible than other parties for the reference to a master. An interim allocation may be amended to reflect a decision on the merits.
53.09 Appointment of Statutory Referee A statutory referee employed in the judicial branch is subject to this rule only when the order referring a matter to the statutory referee expressly provides that the reference is made under this rule.
A master is a person a court appoints to take on specific duties in a case, usually because the matter needs special attention a sitting judge cannot easily give it. Rule 53 limits when a master can be appointed: with the parties’ consent, when exceptional circumstances call for it or an accounting or difficult damages calculation is involved, or to handle pretrial or post-trial matters that an available judge cannot address effectively and promptly. A proposed master cannot have any relationship to the parties, lawyers, case, or court that would require a judge to step aside, unless the parties knowingly consent after full disclosure. Before appointing a master, the court has to consider whether the likely expense is fair to impose on the parties and has to guard against unreasonable cost or delay.
Before appointing a master, the court must give the parties notice and a chance to be heard, and parties may suggest candidates. The order appointing the master has to spell out the master’s duties and any limits on the master’s authority, when the master may communicate with the court or a party outside the presence of others, what records the master must keep, the deadlines and standards for reviewing the master’s work, and how the master will be paid. The court can only enter the appointment order after the proposed master files an affidavit disclosing any potential conflicts, and after the parties consent to waive any disclosed conflict.
Once appointed, a master can regulate proceedings and take reasonable measures to carry out the assigned duties, including imposing certain non-contempt sanctions on a party and recommending sanctions against a non-party or contempt sanctions against a party. A master who makes an order must file it and serve a copy on each party, and a master’s report has to be filed and served the same way unless the court says otherwise. A party has 21 days after service of the master’s order, report, or recommendations to object or move to have the court adopt or modify them, unless the court sets a different deadline. On factual findings, the court generally has to review all objections independently, unless the parties agreed the findings would be reviewed only for clear error or would be treated as final. Legal conclusions always get independent review. Procedural rulings get overturned only for an abuse of discretion, unless the appointment order says otherwise.
Advisory Committee Comments—2015 Amendments
Rule 53.02(b) is amended to add a new subdivision (6) that expressly requires the court’s appointment order to address the extent to which the parties and an appointed master must use the court’s E-Filing System. This provision recognizes that a particular master may not otherwise be a registered user of the court’s E-Filing System, and it may be appropriate either to direct that the parties and the master use the system for all service and filing or in the rare case, to excuse the master and parties from doing so.