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

Minn. Stat. § 518.27 (2026)

Name Of Party

✓ text as last checked Sept. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Except as provided in section 259.13, in the final decree of dissolution or legal separation the court shall, if requested by a party, change the name of that party to another name as the party requests. The court shall grant a request unless it finds that there is an intent to defraud or mislead, unless the name change is subject to section 259.13, in which case the requirements of that section apply. The court shall notify the parties that use of a different surname after dissolution or legal separation without complying with section 259.13, if applicable, is a gross misdemeanor. The party's new name shall be so designated in the final decree.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 4 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1944–2025 · leading case: Warner v. Warner, 17 N.W.2d 58 (Minn. 1944).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Warner v. Warner, 17 N.W.2d 58 (Minn. 1944). · cites it 2× “he wife and children, or either of them, or for the appointment of trustees to receive and hold any property for the use of the wife or children, the court, from time to time, on petition of either of the parties, may revise and alter such order or decree respecting the amount…”
Larsen v. Erickson, 24 N.W.2d 711 (Minn. 1946). · cites it 2× “" *368 By § 518.27 5 it is provided: “When a decree of divorce from the bonds of matrimony is granted in this state, such decree shall completely dissolve the marriage contract as to both parties.”
In re the Marriage of Zachary Dean Hollingsworth v. Anne Marie Halling Roe, ..., No. a241758 (Minn. Ct. App. Nov. 17, 2025). · cites it 12× “Minn. Stat. § 518.27 (2024). Minnesota Statutes section 259.”
Hedberg v. Comm'r, 31 T.C.M. 277 (Tax Ct. 1972). “Minnesota Statute, sec. 518.27 . See also Warner v. Warner, 219 Minn.”
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.