for depositions taken for litigation pending in a jurisdiction outside of Minnesota. The

procedure for obtaining or issuance of a subpoena under Rule 45.06 is governed by Minnesota law, but the rule is amended to make it clear that in situations involving a conflict of substantive law, such as whether a question is governed by a recognized privilege, resolution depends on the application of Minnesota's conflict-of-law principles. This analysis might, in some cases, require the application of another jurisdiction's substantive law. See, e.g., Milkovich v. Saari, 295 Minn. 155, 161-71, 203 N.W.2d 408, 414-17 (1973); see generally William B. Danforth, Developments in the Minnesota Law of Conflict of Laws, 8 Wm. Mitchell L. Rev. 785 (1982).