Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 256.87 (2026)

[Repealed]

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

[Renumbered 518A.82]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 44 cases, 1984–2014 · leading case: State Ex Rel. Region VIII North Welfare Ex Rel. Evans v. Evans, 402 N.W.2d 158 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987).
State Ex Rel. Region VIII North Welfare Ex Rel. Evans v. Evans, 402 N.W.2d 158 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 51× “Appellant County brought this action under Minn.Stat. § 256.87, subd. 1 (1984) to recoup from respondent welfare payments made to Shirley Evans.”
Cnty. of Nicollet v. Larson, 421 N.W.2d 717 (Minn. 1988). · cites it 30× “We agree that it is within the trial court’s discretion “to order reimbursement and how much reimbursement to order. Reimbursement is governed by two standards: 1) the parent’s ability to pay, and 2) the amount of assistance furnished to and for the benefit of the child.”
Cnty. of Anoka v. Richards, 345 N.W.2d 263 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 23× “This is an appeal from an order of the Anoka County District Court that resulted from an action commenced by the County on April 28, 1983, pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 256.87, subd. 1, to recover money from a parent of a child receiving public assistance.”
Anderson v. Anderson, 470 N.W.2d 719 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 56× “The county argues the ALJ erred in ruling that the reservation of child support in the dissolution decree precluded reimbursement for past assistance furnished under Minn.Stat. § 256.87, subd. 1 (1990). We reverse and remand.”
Cnty. of Isanti v. Formhals, 358 N.W.2d 703 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 24× “This action was commenced pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 256.87, subd. 1, to recover money from a parent of a child receiving public assistance.”
Schaefer v. Weber, 567 N.W.2d 29 (Minn. 1997). · cites it 22× “However, the ALJ held that under Minn.Stat. § 256.87 (1996), Weber’s liability for past AFDC payments was limited to the two years prior to the 1995 motion, rather than two years prior to the 1991 complaint.”
State, Cnty. of Clay Ex Rel. Hendrickson v. Hendrickson, 403 N.W.2d 872 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 46× “At that time the county moved for past and ongoing reimbursement from appellant Joseph Hendrickson for AFDC payments expended to Kisa Hendrickson for the benefit of their two children.”
Wilson v. Speer, 499 N.W.2d 850 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 20× “Where there has been no formal adjudication of paternity, may the court order guideline child support from a man presumed the father of a child under Minn. Stat. § 257.55 , subd. 1(e) (1990), where the presumption arises from a signed declaration of parentage? 2.”
Hennepin Cnty. v. Geshick, 387 N.W.2d 439 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 13× “to continue “so long as petitioner receives public assistance for said child.” The county sought reconsideration of this order.”
Marriage of Davis v. Davis, 631 N.W.2d 822 (Minn. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 9× “In her brief, mother characterized this action as an action for reimbursement of public assistance brought pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 256.87 (2000) and argued that the district court abused its discretion in failing to determine that the children were entitled to MinnesotaCare…”
State Ex Rel. Miller v. Miller, 446 N.W.2d 199 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 30× “Beltrami County appeals from a judgment in an action it commenced pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 256.87 for ongoing reimbursement of public assistance.”
Ver Kuilen v. Ver Kuilen, 578 N.W.2d 790 (Minn. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 12× “We will not reverse the judge’s decision under Minn.Stat. § 256.87 (1996 & Supp.1997) absent an abuse of discretion.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.