Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 256B.17 (2026)

Transfers Of Property

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

Subdivision 1.

[Repealed, 1997 c 107 s 19]

Subd. 2.

[Repealed, 1997 c 107 s 19]

Subd. 3.

[Repealed, 1997 c 107 s 19]

Subd. 4.

[Repealed, 1997 c 107 s 19]

Subd. 5.

[Repealed, 1997 c 107 s 19]

Subd. 6.

[Repealed, 1997 c 107 s 19]

Subd. 7.Exception for asset transfers.

An institutionalized spouse, institutionalized before October 1, 1989, for a continuous period, who applies for medical assistance on or after July 1, 1983, may transfer liquid assets to a noninstitutionalized spouse if all of the following conditions apply:

(a) The noninstitutionalized spouse is not applying for or receiving assistance;

(b) Either (1) the noninstitutionalized spouse has less than $10,000 in liquid assets, including assets singly owned and 50 percent of assets owned jointly with the institutionalized spouse; or (2) the noninstitutionalized spouse has less than 50 percent of the total value of nonexempt assets owned by both parties, jointly or individually;

(c) The amount transferred, together with the noninstitutionalized spouse's own assets, totals no more than one-half of the total value of the liquid assets of the parties or $10,000 in liquid assets, whichever is greater; and

(d) The transfer may be effected only once, at the time of initial medical assistance application.

Subd. 8.

[Repealed, 1997 c 107 s 19]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 1985–1987 · leading case: Herman v. Ramsey Cnty. Cmty. Human Servs. Dep't, 373 N.W.2d 345 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985).
Herman v. Ramsey Cnty. Cmty. Human Servs. Dep't, 373 N.W.2d 345 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 4× “In addition, the receipt was filed without consideration and thus appears to be a transfer for less than adequate consideration under Minn.Stat. § 256B.17, subd. 1 (1984). Such a transfer is grounds for denying appellant medical assistance for an extended period of time.”
Wulke v. Hennepin Cnty. Welfare Bd., 409 N.W.2d 902 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 15× “The issue is answered when we apply Minn.Stat 256B.17, TRANSFERS OF PROPERTY, to the circumstances presented.”
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.