The Minnesota Law Review (ISSN 0026-5535) is published six times a year in November, December, February, April, May, and June by the Minnesota Law Review Foundation, 285 Walter F. Mondale Hall, 229 19th Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455. Periodicals postage paid at Minneapolis, Minnesota and at additional mailing office.

Subscriptions are automatically renewed upon expiration unless a request for discontinuance is received. Back issues and volumes are available from William S. Hein & Co., 1285 Main Street, Buffalo, New York 14209.


  • Domestic Subscription: $40.00
    (Six issues, November to June)
  • International Subscription: $46.00
    (Six issues, November to June)
  • Single Issue: $10.00


Please send subscription requests or questions to:

Minnesota Law Review
University of Minnesota Law School
229 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455

Classroom Use:

Articles in the Minnesota Law Review that the author has not retained a copyright to may be duplicated for classroom use provided that:

  1. Each copy is distributed at or below cost,
  2. The author and the Minnesota Law Review are identified,
  3. Proper notice of copyright is affixed to each copy, and
  4. The Minnesota Law Review Foundation is notified of the use.

Address Communications to:

Minnesota Law Review
University of Minnesota Law School
229 19th Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55455


Subscription Office:

Editorial Office: (612) 625-9330

Fax: (612) 624-5400


Please send address changes to the above address.

De Novo

  • Case Comment: Bhogaita v. Altamonte

    EVERY DOG CAN HAVE HIS DAY IN COURT: THE USE OF ANIMALS AS DEMONSTRATIVE EXHIBITS Kyle R. Kroll, Volume 100, Online Managing Editor In Bhogaita v. Altamonte, the Eleventh Circuit recently decided whether to allow a dog in the courtroom as a demonstrative exhibit.[1] Although the case presented many serious [...]

  • Revisiting Water Bankruptcy

    REVISITING WATER BANKRUPTCY IN CALIFORNIA’S FOURTH YEAR OF DROUGHT Olivia Moe, Volume 100, Managing Editor This spring, as “extreme” to “exceptional” drought stretched across most of California—indicating that a four-year streak of drought was not about to resolve itself[1]—Governor Jerry Brown issued an unprecedented order to reduce potable urban water [...]

  • Defying Auer Deference

    DEFYING AUER DEFERENCE: SKIDMORE AS A SOLUTION TO CONSERVATIVE CONCERNS IN PEREZ v. MORTGAGE BANKERS ASSOCIATION Nicholas R. Bednar, Volume 100, Lead Articles Editor* On March 9, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States handed down its decision in Perez v. Mortgage Bankers Association.[1]F The Court overturned the D.C. [...]