If the owner is married, no conveyance of the homestead, except a mortgage for purchase money under section 507.03, a conveyance between spouses pursuant to section 500.19, subdivision 4, or a severance of a joint tenancy pursuant to section 500.19, subdivision 5, shall be valid without the signatures of both spouses. A spouse's signature may be made by the spouse's duly appointed attorney-in-fact.
Spouses who are married to each other may convey the real estate of either by their joint deed. A spouse, by separate deed, may convey any real estate owned by that spouse, except the homestead, subject to the rights of the other spouse therein; and either spouse may, by separate conveyance, relinquish all rights in the real estate so conveyed by the other spouse. Subject to the foregoing provisions, either spouse may separately appoint an attorney-in-fact to sell or convey any real estate owned by that spouse, or join in any conveyance made by or for the other spouse. Use of a power of attorney is subject to section 518.58, subdivision 1a. A minor spouse has legal capacity to join in a conveyance of real estate owned by the other spouse, so long as the minor spouse is not incapacitated because of some reason other than that spouse's minor age.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
50
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1943–2025 · leading case:
Gores v. Schultz, 777 N.W.2d 522 (Minn. Ct. App. 2009).
Gores v. Schultz, 777 N.W.2d 522 (Minn. Ct. App. 2009).
· cites it 83× “Did the district court err in concluding that the Banks could not challenge the validity of the Goreses’ mortgage under Minn.Stat. § 507.02? II. If the Banks can challenge the validity of the Goreses’ mortgage, is that mortgage void? ANALYSIS I.”
Wells Fargo Home Mortg., Inc. v. Newton, 646 N.W.2d 888 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002).
· cites it 50× “02 (1998), the spousal-signature requirement in Minn.Stat. § 507.02 (1998) does not apply to the mortgage because Newton owned the mortgaged property when she married Witkowski; and (3) the district court erroneously dismissed its claims against Newton regarding money owed under…”
Marine Credit Union v. Detlefson-Delano, 830 N.W.2d 859 (Minn. 2013).
· cites it 39× “1 The district court granted summary judgment to Detlefson-Delano after concluding that the mortgage Detlefson-Delano signed with MCU is void under Minn.Stat. § 507.02 (2012) because it was not also signed by Antonio.”
Wells Fargo Home Mortg., Inc. v. Chojnacki, 668 N.W.2d 1 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003).
· cites it 27× “In a mortgage-foreclosure action, appellant challenges the district court’s grant of summary judgment to respondent, arguing that the district court erred by concluding that the mortgage held by appellant was not a purchase-money mortgage and therefore not exempt from the…”
Nat'l City Bank v. Engler, 777 N.W.2d 762 (Minn. Ct. App. 2010).
· cites it 24× “Because the purpose of Minn.Stat. § 507.02, which seeks to protect the non-signing spouse’s interest in the homestead from wrongful conveyance, was satisfied by respondent’s waiver of homestead rights, we reverse.”
Larson v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A., 799 F. Supp. 2d 961 (D. Minnesota 2011).
· cites it 36× “02 With exceptions which are not relevant in this case, Minn.Stat. § 507.02 provides that, “[i]f the owner is married, no conveyance of the homestead .”
Kipp v. Sweno, 683 N.W.2d 259 (Minn. 2004).
· cites it 12× “4 (2002); Minn.Stat. § 507.02 (2002). Moreover, severing the joint tenancy does not completely destroy a spouse's survivorship interest because Minnesota provides statutory protection for a surviving spouse's interest in homestead property.”
HSBC Mortg. Servs., Inc. v. Graikowski, 812 N.W.2d 845 (Minn. Ct. App. 2012).
· cites it 38× “In this mortgage dispute, appellant fee owner argues that (1) the district court erred when it did not adjudge his mortgage void under Minn.Stat. § 507.02 (2010), 1 and (2) the facts of the case do not support the application of equitable estop-pel.”
Ann H. O'Hagan v. United States, 86 F.3d 776 (8th Cir. 1996).
· cites it 11× “; Minn.Stat. § 507.02. Furthermore, Mr. O’Hagan would normally have the right to unilaterally sever the joint tenancy and devise his remainder interest subject to a life estate in Mrs.”
Dvorak v. Maring, 285 N.W.2d 675 (Minn. 1979).
· cites it 10× “The issues raised are whether a spouse’s endorsement on an earnest money check constitutes a signature within the contemplation of Minn.Stat. § 507.02 (1978) prohibiting alienation of homestead property without the signatures of both husband and wife; whether the conduct of…”
State Bank of Pennock v. Schwenk, 395 N.W.2d 371 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 9× “Those rights are addressed in Minn.Stat. §§ 507.02 and 518.54, subd. 5 (1984).”
Marshall v. Marshall, 921 F. Supp. 641 (D. Minnesota 1995).
· cites it 19× “See Minn.Stat. § 507.02 (“If the owner is married, no conveyance of the homestead, except .”
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.