Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 513. AGREEMENTS RELATING TO PROPERTY
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 513.075 (2026)

Cohabitation; Property And Financial Agreements

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

If sexual relations between the parties are contemplated, a contract between a man and a woman who are living together in this state out of wedlock, or who are about to commence living together in this state out of wedlock, is enforceable as to terms concerning the property and financial relations of the parties only if:

(1) the contract is written and signed by the parties; and

(2) enforcement is sought after termination of the relationship.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 19 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1983–2025 · leading case: Est. of Peterson, 579 N.W.2d 488 (Minn. Ct. App. 1998).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Est. of Peterson, 579 N.W.2d 488 (Minn. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 60× “075 provides: If sexual relations between the parties are contemplated, a contract between a man and a woman who are living together in this state out of wedlock, or who are about to commence living together in this state out of wedlock, is enforceable as to terms concerning the…”
In Re Est. of Eriksen, 337 N.W.2d 671 (Minn. 1983). · cites it 14× “Wicklund argues on appeal that Minn.Stat. § 513.075 (1982) absolutely bars a trial court from enforcing an agreement regarding property and financial relations between an unwed, cohabiting man and woman, unless the agreement is in writing.”
Hollom v. Carey, 343 N.W.2d 701 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 15× “The district court ruled that appellant, Joyce Carey, was unlawfully detaining property from respondent, Benny Hollom, and that appellant’s claim for damages was barred by Minn.Stat. §§ 513.075 and 513.076 (Cohabitation, property and financial arrangements; Necessity of…”
In Re Est. of Palmen, 588 N.W.2d 493 (Minn. 1999). · cites it 19× “The Personal Representative denied the claim and eventually moved for summary judgment claiming that, among other things, Minn.Stat. §§ 513.075 1 and 513.076 2 bar Schneider’s claim.”
Mechura v. McQuillan, 419 N.W.2d 855 (Minn. Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 19× “See Minn.Stat. §§ 513.075 and 513.076 (1986).”
Marriage of Cummings v. Cummings, 376 N.W.2d 726 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 9× “Respondent contends that Minn.Stat. § 513.075 and § 513.076 (1984) compel the court to disregard the cohabitation period.”
In Re Est. of Palmen, 574 N.W.2d 743 (Minn. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 16× “Minn.Stat. § 513.075 (1996). Unless the claim satisfies the requirements of section 513.”
Roatch v. Puera, 534 N.W.2d 560 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 10× “II. Contracts regarding the property and financial relations of parties cohabitating in this state out of wedlock are enforceable only if in writing and signed by both parties.”
Obert v. Dahl, 574 N.W.2d 747 (Minn. Ct. App. 1998). · cites it 10× “In granting summary judgment to Dahl, the court concluded that the “anti-palimony” statutes, Minn.Stat. §§ 513.075, .076 (1996) prohibited enforcement of any non-written property contract between the parties based on the fact that the “individuals lived together in contemplation…”
Tourville v. Kowarsch, 365 N.W.2d 298 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 6× “This court must initially consider whether Minn.Stat. §§ 513.075 and 513.076 (1984) are applicable to this case.”
Moore v. Sordahl, 389 N.W.2d 748 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 10× “In entering judgment for respondents, children of James Moore, the trial court found that, although appellant’s claims arose prior to the effective date of the Minnesota palimony statutes, Minn.Stat. §§ 513.075 and 513.-076, case law interpreting the statutes was, nonetheless,…”
Wendt v. Hane, 401 N.W.2d 457 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “(The division of property acquired during *460 cohabitation is now governed by Minn.Stat. §§ 513.075 and 513.076 (1984)).”
Show all 19 citing cases →
— Minn. Stat. § 513.075(1) — 1 case
Est. of Peterson, 579 N.W.2d 488 (Minn. Ct. App. 1998). “075 provides: If sexual relations between the parties are contemplated, a contract between a man and a woman who are living together in this state out of wedlock, or who are about to commence living together in this state out of wedlock, is enforceable as to terms concerning 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.