§
Subdivision 1.General.
Except as provided in subdivision 2, no dissolution shall be granted unless:
(1) one of the parties has resided in this state, or has been a member of the armed services stationed in this state, for not less than 180 days immediately preceding the commencement of the proceeding; or
(2) one of the parties has been a domiciliary of this state for not less than 180 days immediately preceding commencement of the proceeding.
§
Subd. 2.Action for dissolution by certain nonresidents.
(a) If neither party to the civil marriage is a resident of this state at the commencement of the proceeding, a court of this state has jurisdiction over the dissolution if:
(1) the civil marriage was performed in this state; and
(2) neither party to the civil marriage resides in a jurisdiction that will maintain an action for dissolution by the parties because of the sex or sexual orientation of the spouses.
(b) There is a rebuttable presumption that a jurisdiction will not maintain an action for dissolution if the jurisdiction does not recognize the civil marriage.
(c) An action for dissolution authorized by this subdivision must be adjudicated in accordance with the laws of this state.
Notes of Decisions
Marriage of Jones v. Jones, 402 N.W.2d 146 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 6× “Minn.Stat. § 518.07 (1984) provides: Residence of parties No dissolution shall be granted unless (1) one of the parties has resided in this state * * * for not less than 180 days immediately preceding the commencement of the proceeding; or (2) one of the parties has been a…”
Marriage of Berc v. Berc, 407 N.W.2d 131 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 16× “Max Berc appeals the dismissal, claiming he is a dom-icilliary of Minnesota and that Minnesota has jurisdiction over the dissolution pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 518.07. We reverse and remand for a hearing to determine whether appellant is a domicilliary of Minnesota under Minn.”
Marriage of Reed v. Albaaj, 723 N.W.2d 50 (Minn. Ct. App. 2006).
· cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 518.07 (2004). Because Reed had resided in Minnesota for more than 180 days before the commencement of the dissolution proceeding, the district court had authority to grant a dissolution of her marriage to Albaaj.”
Donigan v. Donigan, 53 N.W.2d 635 (Minn. 1952).
· cites it 4× “Section 518.07 provides: “No divorce shall be granted unless the plaintiff has resided in this state one year immediately preceding the filing of the complaint, except for adultery committed while the plaintiff was a resident of this state.”
Johnson v. Johnson, 27 N.W.2d 289 (Minn. 1947).
· cites it 2× “1945, § 518.07, 5 if proper service was made upon the defendant, jurisdiction was conferred upon the court.”
Davidner v. Davidner, 232 N.W.2d 5 (Minn. 1975).
· cites it 2× “07: “No divorce shall be granted unless the plaintiff has resided in this state one year immediately preceding the filing of the complaint, except for adultery committed while the plaintiff was a resident of this state.” L.”
Davis v. Davis, 210 N.W.2d 221 (Minn. 1973).
“The summons and complaint in the divorce action were served on defendant in Missouri on August 30, 1971, and the Minnesota attorney general was notified that plaintiff was challenging the constitutionality of the 1-year durational-residency requirement contained in § 518.07. The…”
LeFebvre v. LeFebvre, 232 N.W.2d 786 (Minn. 1975).
“1971, § 518.07, and, therefore, held that the divorce was improperly granted.”
In re the Marriage of: Maria Suljic v. Ibrahim Suljic, No. A16-58 (Minn. Ct. App. Sept. 6, 2016).
· cites it 2× “Minnesota Statutes section 518.07 (2014) provides that no dissolution shall be granted unless one of the parties has resided in the state for not less than 180 days.”
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.