Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 257.58 (2026)

Limitation Of Actions; Exceptions

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

Subdivision 1.Actions for children without a presumed father.

Except as otherwise provided in section 259.52, an action to determine the existence of the father and child relationship as to a child who has no presumed father under section 257.55 is not barred until one year after the child reaches the age of majority.

Subd. 2.Heirship.

Section 257.57 and this section do not extend the time within which a right of inheritance or a right to a succession may be asserted beyond the time provided by law relating to distribution and closing of decedents' estates or to the determination of heirship, or otherwise.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases, 1985–2006 · leading case: Marriage of Clay v. Clay, 397 N.W.2d 571 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986).
Marriage of Clay v. Clay, 397 N.W.2d 571 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 16× “'s mother and Blue Earth County would have the option of commencing paternity action under Minn.Stat. § 257.58 (1985) against anyone that they reasonably believed was the real father.”
Nicholson v. Maack, 400 N.W.2d 160 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 30× “Appellant Marilyn Maack, Jennifer's mother, admitted in her answer that Nicholson was Jennifer's father, but raised as an affirmative defense the statute of limitations in Minn.Stat. § 257.58 (1984). That statute (which has since been amended) required paternity actions…”
In Re Est. of Martignacco, 689 N.W.2d 262 (Minn. Ct. App. 2004). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 257.58 (2002). Appellant argues that the district court erred in its application of the law by determining that respondent was the sole heir of decedent when it failed to apply the time limitations of the Parentage Act, as permitted — but not required — by the…”
In Re the Est. of Jotham, 722 N.W.2d 447 (Minn. 2006). · cites it 4× “Had Smith been required to use the Parentage Act to establish paternity, his claim would have been barred by the statute of limitations in Minn.Stat. § 257.58. In Palmer, we interpreted the phrase "may be established" in Minn.”
Marriage of Pierce v. Pierce, 374 N.W.2d 450 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 4× “Robert Pierce cites Minn.Stat. § 257.58, subd. 1, as the relevant statute of limitations.”
Larson v. Schmidt, 400 N.W.2d 131 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 7× “Schmidt moved for dismissal based on the three-year statute of limitations for non-presumed fathers as set forth in Minn.Stat. § 257.58 (1980) 1 or, alternatively, for change of venue, limitation or denial of visitation, current and retroactive child support, health and life…”
In Re Est. of Palmer, 658 N.W.2d 197 (Minn. 2003). · cites it 2× “…provided, for example, that the Parentage Act does not extend the time limit for asserting a right of succession. Minn.Stat. § 257.58, subd. 2 (2002).”
Voss v. Duerscherl, 384 N.W.2d 499 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 4× “On August 30, 1982, the second trial court concluded the paternity suit was commenced in compliance with Minn.Stat. § 257.58 (regarding statute of limitations), and on December 14, 1982 substituted as the party defendant Kay L.”
In Re the Est. of Jotham, 704 N.W.2d 210 (Minn. Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 2× “58 (1980) (limiting actions to determine the existence of a father-and-child relationship in certain circumstances to either three years after the birth of the child or three years after the effective date of the act, whichever is later).”
Voss v. Duerscherl, 425 N.W.2d 828 (Minn. 1988). · cites it 2× “Minn. Stat. § 257.58 (1986). Nor do we decide, in case such an action is maintainable, whether parents and siblings may be required as witnesses to submit to blood testing.”
Matter of Paternity of JAV, 547 N.W.2d 374 (Minn. 1996). · cites it 2× “6, which provides that an action to determine paternity may not be brought after the child has been adopted, and Minn.Stat. § 257.58, subd. 1, which provides that an action to establish paternity may not be brought more than one year after a child has reached majority.”
State, Douglas Cty. Ex Rel. Ward v. Carlson, 409 N.W.2d 490 (Minn. 1987). · cites it 2× “3, action would obviate the constitutional issue posed by the certified question — even though the county's action would be subject to the limitation then provided by section 257.58 — emphasizes the very limited utility of certified questions, which are usually presented in the…”
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.