Get Review With a Little Help From Your Friends

February 19, 2018

The Minnesota Supreme Court recently filed an opinion in a legal malpractice case —Frederick v. Wallerich, No. A15-2052 (Minn. Feb. 7, 2018). What struck us about the opinion, even more than the substantive legal issue and the merits of the decision, was that there were three amici listed as participants in the case. It started us thinking about just how important amici are in the Supreme Court’s process. Our conclusion was that while amici may submit briefs that guide the court on the merits, their most significant impact may be in communicating the importance of the case and why review should be granted.

Reprinted with permission of Minnesota Lawyer ©2019

The articles on our website include some of the publications and papers authored by our attorneys, both before and after they joined our firm. The content of these articles should not be taken as legal advice. The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views or official position of Robins Kaplan LLP.


Eric J. Magnuson


Chair, Appellate Practice
Pronouns: he/his

Lisa Beane

Related Publications

Fall 2021
Are All Fiduciaries Created Equal?
Erica Ramsey - The Robins Kaplan Spotlight, Vol. 6, No. 3
Fall 2021
Context Matters: Fiduciaries and the Rule Against Self-Dealing
Brendan Johnson, Tim Billion - The Robins Kaplan Spotlight, Vol. 6, No. 3
Fall 2021
Update on DOL Fiduciary Rule
Michael Reif - The Robins Kaplan Spotlight, Vol. 6, No. 3
September 28, 2021
Briefly: Federal appeals: How much notice is enough?
Stephen Safranski and Geoffrey Kozen - Minnesota Lawyer
Summer 2021
IATL President's Letter on Judicial Security
Roman Silberfeld - The Robins Kaplan Quarterly: Tackling Tough Business Litigation Matters
Back to Top