Stinson LLP v. University of Minnesota

A law firm filed a summary judgment motion in its lawsuit under the Minnesota Government Data Practices Act (DPA) against the University of Minnesota, from which the law firm said it requested “government data on topics of great public interests—namely, the environmental impact of fossil fuel consumption and the University’s involvement in promoting climate-related litigation”—in August 2020. The law firm argued that because the University had failed to produce responsive data and had refused to commit to a production schedule, it had failed to comply with the DPA’s requirement that data be produced in an “appropriate and prompt manner” or within a “reasonable time.” The law firm alleged that Attorney General Keith Ellison drew on memoranda by University faculty that compiled and developed the legal theories underlying the State of Minnesota’s climate change lawsuit against fossil fuel entities, and that the firm’s DPA requests were “aimed at learning more about two related topics: (i) the University’s contributions to the public debate over climate change, and (ii) its involvement in developing General Ellison’s legal theories.”