Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 518A.02 (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[Repealed]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[Repealed, 1999 c 74 art 3 s 18]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 16 cases, 1980–1997 · leading case: In Re the Marriage of Schmidt, 436 N.W.2d 99 (Minn. 1989).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

In Re the Marriage of Schmidt, 436 N.W.2d 99 (Minn. 1989). · cites it 6× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.02(d) defines a “custody decree” as “a custody determination contained * * * in an order made in a custody proceeding, and includes an initial decree * * Neither the UCCJA nor Minn.”

Matter of Welfare of Mullins, 298 N.W.2d 56 (Minn. 1980). · cites it 4× “" Minn.Stat. § 518A.02(e) (1978). [5] Minn.”

Matter of Trapp, 593 S.W.2d 193 (Mo. 1980). · cites it 2× “See Minn.Stat.Ann. §§ 518A.02(c), 518A.10 (Supp.”

Marriage of McLain v. McLain, 569 N.W.2d 219 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.02(b) (1996). Under UCCJA provisions of both states, jurisdiction to make a "custody determination" can, under some circumstances, continue even where the child has since attained home-state status in another state.”

Marriage of Abu-Dalbouh v. Abu-Dalbouh, 547 N.W.2d 700 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.02 (e) (1994) defines “home state” as: the state in which the child immediately preceding the time involved lived with the child’s parents, a parent, or a person acting as a parent, for at least six consecutive months* * *.”

Marriage of Snow v. Snow, 369 N.W.2d 581 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “§ 1738A(b)(4); Minn.Stat. § 518A.02(e) (1984). The district court also found that respondent and the children have a significant connection with Minnesota and that there is substantial evidence in Minnesota concerning the children’s care, protection and personal relationships.”

Marriage of Biscoe v. Biscoe, 443 N.W.2d 221 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 2× “03, subdivision 1(b), commonly referred to as “best-interest” jurisdiction, which allows the state to assume jurisdiction where (1) the child and parents or the child and at least one parent have a significant connection with the state, and (2) there is substantial evidence in…”

Marriage of Coleman v. Coleman, 493 N.W.2d 133 (Minn. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.02(e). Minnesota has custody jurisdiction if it is the child’s home state at the commencement of the proceeding or was the child’s home state within six months prior to the proceeding.”

Marriage of Smith v. Smith, 508 N.W.2d 222 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “See Minn.Stat. § 518A.02(e) (“home state” means the state in which the child immediately preceding the time involved lived with the child’s parents, a parent, or a person acting as parent, for at least six consecutive months).”

Marriage of Sawle v. Nicholson, 408 N.W.2d 173 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “" Minn.Stat. § 518A.02(e) (1986). The proceeding was commenced on June 26, 1986 when Sawle moved the Minnesota court to assume jurisdiction and modify visitation.”

Marriage of Beier v. Beier, 371 N.W.2d 52 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.02(e) (1984). Respondent and Jeremy resided in Illinois for only two months at the time the Minnesota trial court heard motions.”

Marriage of Ferguson v. Ferguson, 411 N.W.2d 238 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “1 (1986) (jurisdictional requirements of Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act).”

Show all 16 citing cases →

— Minn. Stat. § 518A.02(b) — 4 cases

Marriage of McLain v. McLain, 569 N.W.2d 219 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). “Minn.Stat. § 518A.02(b) (1996). Under UCCJA provisions of both states, jurisdiction to make a "custody determination" can, under some circumstances, continue even where the child has since attained home-state status in another state.”

Marriage of Biscoe v. Biscoe, 443 N.W.2d 221 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989). “03, subdivision 1(b), commonly referred to as “best-interest” jurisdiction, which allows the state to assume jurisdiction where (1) the child and parents or the child and at least one parent have a significant connection with the state, and (2) there is substantial evidence in…”

Marriage of Ferguson v. Ferguson, 411 N.W.2d 238 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). “1 (1986) (jurisdictional requirements of Uniform Child Custody Jurisdiction Act).”

Klumpner v. Klumpner, 537 N.E.2d 914 (Ill. App. Ct. 1989).

— Minn. Stat. § 518A.02(c) — 1 case

Matter of Trapp, 593 S.W.2d 193 (Mo. 1980). “See Minn.Stat.Ann. §§ 518A.02(c), 518A.10 (Supp.”

— Minn. Stat. § 518A.02(d) — 1 case

In Re the Marriage of Schmidt, 436 N.W.2d 99 (Minn. 1989). “Minn.Stat. § 518A.02(d) defines a “custody decree” as “a custody determination contained * * * in an order made in a custody proceeding, and includes an initial decree * * Neither the UCCJA nor Minn.”

— Minn. Stat. § 518A.02(e) — 9 cases

Matter of Welfare of Mullins, 298 N.W.2d 56 (Minn. 1980). “" Minn.Stat. § 518A.02(e) (1978). [5] Minn.”

Marriage of Snow v. Snow, 369 N.W.2d 581 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). “§ 1738A(b)(4); Minn.Stat. § 518A.02(e) (1984). The district court also found that respondent and the children have a significant connection with Minnesota and that there is substantial evidence in Minnesota concerning the children’s care, protection and personal relationships.”

Marriage of Coleman v. Coleman, 493 N.W.2d 133 (Minn. Ct. App. 1992). “Minn.Stat. § 518A.02(e). Minnesota has custody jurisdiction if it is the child’s home state at the commencement of the proceeding or was the child’s home state within six months prior to the proceeding.”

Marriage of Smith v. Smith, 508 N.W.2d 222 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993). “See Minn.Stat. § 518A.02(e) (“home state” means the state in which the child immediately preceding the time involved lived with the child’s parents, a parent, or a person acting as parent, for at least six consecutive months).”

— Minn. Stat. § 518A.02(j) — 1 case

Marriage of Desjarlait v. Desjarlait, 379 N.W.2d 139 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985).

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.