Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 518A.06 (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[Repealed]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[Repealed, 1999 c 74 art 3 s 18]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 8 cases, 1985–1997 · 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 4× “at 219-20, codified at Minn.Stat. § 518A.06. Thus, before a Minnesota court can assert jurisdiction under the Act, it must first determine the existence or nonexistence of any pending custody proceeding in another state.”

Marriage of Coleman v. Coleman, 493 N.W.2d 133 (Minn. Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 10× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.06, subd. 1 requires that a Minnesota court shall not exercise its jurisdiction under [the UCCJA] if * * * a proceeding concerning the custody of the child [is] pending in * * * another state exercising jurisdiction substantially in conformity with *136 the…”

Marriage of McLain v. McLain, 569 N.W.2d 219 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 4× “See Minn.Stat. § 518A.06, subd. 3 (1996) (compelling court, if it learns of proceedings pending in another state, to consult with the court of the other state to determine the most appropriate forum for resolving the issues in question); Tex.”

Marriage of Abu-Dalbouh v. Abu-Dalbouh, 547 N.W.2d 700 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.06, subd. 1 (1994) (emphasis added).”

Marriage of Snow v. Snow, 369 N.W.2d 581 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “Appellant also claims the trial court’s order should be reversed because it failed to directly contact the South Dakota court as required by Minn.Stat. § 518A.06 (1984). Although the trial court correctly determined the South Dakota court did not have jurisdiction in this…”

Marriage of Sawle v. Nicholson, 408 N.W.2d 173 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.06 provides that when a Minnesota court is informed of a proceeding on the child's custody is pending in another court, the Minnesota court shall communicate with the other court concerning the proper forum for the litigation.”

Marriage of Nazar v. Nazar, 474 N.W.2d 206 (Minn. Ct. App. 1991). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.06, subd. 1 (1990) (emphasis added).”

Marriage of Nazar v. Nazar, 505 N.W.2d 628 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.06, subd. 3 (1992). The drafters of the UCCJA commented: Because of the havoc wreaked by simultaneous and competitive jurisdiction * * *, this section seeks to avoid jurisdictional conflict with all feasible means, including novel methods.”

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.