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

Minn. Stat. § 518A.14 (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[Repealed]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[Repealed, 1999 c 74 art 3 s 18]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 10 cases, 1980–2016 · leading case: Matter of Welfare of Mullins, 298 N.W.2d 56 (Minn. 1980).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Matter of Welfare of Mullins, 298 N.W.2d 56 (Minn. 1980). · cites it 8× “See Minn.Stat. § 518A.14 (1978). But despite the apparent proscription against concurrent jurisdiction, the decisions of the Wisconsin Supreme Court in Zillmer v.”
Marriage of McLain v. McLain, 569 N.W.2d 219 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 8× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.14, subd. 1 (1996) (precluding modification of another state's custody determination if the other court (a) "now" has jurisdiction under state law with "jurisdiction prerequisites substantially in accordance with" Minnesota's version of the UCCJA, and (b) has…”
Marriage of Sawle v. Nicholson, 408 N.W.2d 173 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 12× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.14, subd. 1 (1986) governs modification of a child custody award made by another state's court: If a court of another state has made a custody decree, a court of this state shall not modify that decree unless (1) it appears to the court of this state that the…”
Schoeberlein v. Rohlfing, 383 N.W.2d 386 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 5× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.14, subd. 1. While this section does not strictly concern jurisdiction, it does limit the relief a trial court can grant.”
Bergh v. Bergh, 387 N.W.2d 213 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 6× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.14, subd. 1 (1984) governs modification by a Minnesota court of a custody decree issued by another state: If a court of another state has made a custody decree, a court of this state shall not modify that decree unless (1) it appears to the court of this state…”
Marriage of Beier v. Beier, 371 N.W.2d 52 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.14, subd. 1 (1984). Had Sandra Beier still resided in Texas in October 1984, Texas would have had primary jurisdiction to hear the custody matter.”
Marriage of Snow v. Snow, 369 N.W.2d 581 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 2× “See Minn.Stat. § 518A.14 (1984). Respondent and the two children have resided in Minnesota since 1982 making Minnesota the home state.”
Marriage of Smith v. Smith, 508 N.W.2d 222 (Minn. Ct. App. 1993). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.14, subd. 1. Minn.Stat.”
Landa v. Norris, 313 N.W.2d 423 (Minn. 1981). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 518A.14 (1980). Neither of these conditions is present in the instant case.”
Melissa Dawn Paisley v. Clark Davis Kratzer (Minn. Ct. App. 2016). · cites it 4× “” Minn. Stat. § 518A.14, subd. 1 (1980). The supreme court reasoned that the UCCJA provision “contemplates formal action by that state rejecting jurisdiction” and that “informal comments cannot serve as the basis for [a Minnesota court’s] exercise of jurisdiction.”
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.