Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 518A. CHILD SUPPORT
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 518A.01 (2026)

[Repealed]

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

[Repealed, 1999 c 74 art 3 s 18]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 26 cases, 1980–2001 · leading case: Larson v. Dunn, 460 N.W.2d 39 (Minn. 1990).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Larson v. Dunn, 460 N.W.2d 39 (Minn. 1990). · cites it 8× “See Minn.Stat. §§ 518A.01, subd. 1(b) & 518A.”
Matter of Welfare of Mullins, 298 N.W.2d 56 (Minn. 1980). · cites it 8× “See generally Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act § 1; Minn.Stat. § 518A.01 (1978). Appellants, in bringing their action in the Hennepin County District Court, sought a determination that Minnesota, to the exclusion of California, was the "home state" of their foster child,…”
In Re the Marriage of Schmidt, 436 N.W.2d 99 (Minn. 1989). · cites it 4× “at 123-4, codified at Minn.Stat. § 518A.01 (1988). To facilitate the stated goals, the act generally establishes a “first in time priority.”
Marriage of Snow v. Snow, 369 N.W.2d 581 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 4× “See Minn.Stat. § 518A.01, subd. 1(a) (1984). *584 4.”
Marriage of Sawle v. Nicholson, 408 N.W.2d 173 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 12× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.01, subd. 1 (1986). Both Minnesota and Wisconsin have adopted virtually identical versions of the UCCJA.”
Marriage of Coleman v. Coleman, 493 N.W.2d 133 (Minn. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 6× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.01, subd. 1. Minn.Stat.”
Stone v. Stone, 636 N.W.2d 594 (Minn. Ct. App. 2001). · cites it 2× “1993) (noting purpose of UCCJA as formerly codified under Minn.Stat. § 518A.01, subd. 1(a) (1992)), revieiv denied (Minn.”
Marriage of Beier v. Beier, 371 N.W.2d 52 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 4× “See Minn. Stat. § 518A.01 (1984). The UCCJA prohibits a Minnesota court of this state from modifying the custody decree of another state unless: (1) it appears to the court of this state that the court which rendered the decree does not now have jurisdiction under jurisdictional…”
Schoeberlein v. Rohlfing, 383 N.W.2d 386 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 3× “” Minn.Stat. § 518A.01, subd. 1(b). The drafters of the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act (UCCJA) sought to discourage failure to return children after visitation.”
Marriage of Desjarlait v. Desjarlait, 379 N.W.2d 139 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “See Minn.Stat. § 518A.01, subd. 1 (1984). By definition, “ ‘[sjtate’ means any state, territory, or possession of the United States, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the District of Columbia.”
In the Interest of S_ A_ V, 798 S.W.2d 293 (Tex. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “NOTES [1] Minnesota has also adopted a version of the UCCJA in Minn.Stat.Ann. §§ 518A.01 et seq. (West 1989).”
Landa v. Norris, 313 N.W.2d 423 (Minn. 1981). · cites it 4× “The record indicates that two states, both Minnesota and Ohio, have expressed an interest in exercising jurisdiction to resolve this custody dispute and the narrow question for review is which of those states has primary jurisdiction under the Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction…”
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.