Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 518. MARRIAGE DISSOLUTION
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 518.185 (2026)

Affidavit Practice

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

A party seeking a temporary custody order or modification of a custody order shall submit together with moving papers an affidavit setting forth facts supporting the requested order or modification and shall give notice, together with a copy of the affidavit, to other parties to the proceeding, who may file opposing affidavits.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26 cases, 1981–2016 · leading case: Marriage of Nice-Petersen v. Nice-Petersen, 310 N.W.2d 471 (Minn. 1981).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Marriage of Nice-Petersen v. Nice-Petersen, 310 N.W.2d 471 (Minn. 1981). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 518.185 (1980) requires a party seeking a modification of a custody order to submit together with his moving papers an affidavit setting forth facts in support of the modification and further directs that notice be provided to all other parties to the proceedings to…”
Green v. Green, 2009 ND 162 (N.D. 2009). · cites it 4× “2003); Minn. Stat. § 518.185 (2002)); Tank, 2004 ND 15, ¶¶ 44-46, 48 , 673 N.”
Mock v. Mock, 2004 ND 14 (N.D. 2004). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 518.185 (2002). Therefore, in Minnesota, a party seeking modification of child custody must submit an affidavit asserting facts to support the requested modification.”
Geibe v. Geibe, 571 N.W.2d 774 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 518.185 (1996). The court must determine whether the petitioner has established a prima facie ease by alleging facts that, if true, would provide sufficient grounds for a modification.”
Szarzynski v. Szarzynski, 732 N.W.2d 285 (Minn. Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 518.185 (2006). A party seeking an endangerment-based modification of custody must establish four elements to make a prima facie case for modification: (1) circumstances have changed involving the child or custodial parent; (2) the modification would be in the best…”
Tank v. Tank, 2004 ND 15 (N.D. 2004). · cites it 2× “Although the Minnesota Supreme Court has not directly addressed the conflict among the Minnesota Courts of Appeals' panels on this standard of review issue, it applied an abuse of discretion standard in reviewing whether a district court properly denied a request for an…”
Marriage of Boland v. Murtha, 800 N.W.2d 179 (Minn. Ct. App. 2011). · cites it 2× ““[U]nless the accompanying affidavits set forth sufficient justification, if the facts alleged therein are true, for the modification,” the district court is “require[d] to deny a motion for modification of a custody order.”
Morey v. Peppin, 375 N.W.2d 19 (Minn. 1985). · cites it 2× “In any future motion for modification of the award of child custody in this matter an evidentia-ry hearing shall be scheduled if, by affidavits submitted in support of the motion, Minn.Stat. § 518.185 (1984), the movant makes a prima facie showing of circumstances justifying…”
In Re Weber, 653 N.W.2d 804 (Minn. Ct. App. 2002). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 518.185 (2000). To obtain an evidentiary hearing on a custody-modification petition, the moving party must establish the following four elements of a prima facie case: (1) a change in the circumstances of the child or custodian, (2) that a modification would serve…”
In re the Welfare of the Child. of L.L.P., 836 N.W.2d 563 (Minn. Ct. App. 2013). · cites it 2× “Minn. Stat. § 518.185 . The supreme court has interpreted the custody-modification statutes to require that the petition allege a prima facie case by asserting facts that, if true, would provide grounds for a modification.”
Marriage of Ross v. Ross, 477 N.W.2d 753 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 518.185 (1990). The trial court may deny a motion for modification of a custody order without a hearing if facts in the accompanying affidavits, assuming they are true, do not show sufficient justification for the modification.”
Griese v. Kamp, 666 N.W.2d 404 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 518.185 (2002). To establish a prima "facie case and to obtain an evidentiary hearing, a party moving for custody modification must establish four elements: (1) a change in the circumstances of the child or custodian; (2) that a modification would serve the best…”
Show all 26 citing cases →
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.