Listen to this post

Divorce laws vary significantly from state to state, and understanding these differences is crucial for individuals contemplating divorce in Minnesota or any of its neighboring states—North Dakota, South Dakota, Iowa, and Wisconsin. While all five states follow the basic principles of equitable distribution and no-fault divorce, their unique statutes impact everything from property division to child custody and spousal maintenance.

In this article, we’ll explore the key ways in which Minnesota’s divorce laws differ from those of its neighbors, highlighting the critical distinctions that could affect your divorce proceedings.

1. Grounds for Divorce

Minnesota: Strictly No-Fault

Minnesota is a no-fault divorce state, meaning that neither spouse has to prove wrongdoing by the other to obtain a divorce. The only requirement is that the marriage is “irretrievably broken,” as per Minn. Stat. § 518.06. This approach aims to reduce conflict by eliminating the need for blame-based litigation.

North Dakota & South Dakota: No-Fault and Fault-Based Options

Unlike Minnesota, both North Dakota and South Dakota allow fault-based divorces in addition to no-fault. In these states, a spouse can cite adultery, extreme cruelty, desertion, habitual intemperance, willful neglect, or felony conviction as grounds for divorce. While no-fault divorces are more common, the fault-based option can impact property division and spousal support.

Iowa: No-Fault Only

Like Minnesota, Iowa follows a strictly no-fault approach, requiring only that the marriage has broken down beyond repair. Fault does not play a role in divorce proceedings, including financial settlements.

Wisconsin: No-Fault Only

Wisconsin also follows a no-fault model, with “irretrievable breakdown of the marriage” as the sole ground for divorce. However, if one spouse contests the divorce, the court may require up to a year of separation before finalizing the dissolution.

Key Difference:

Minnesota, Iowa, and Wisconsin do not allow fault-based divorces, while North Dakota and South Dakota provide that option.

2. Property Division

Minnesota: Equitable Distribution

Minnesota follows the equitable distribution model, meaning that marital assets are divided fairly, though not necessarily equally. The court considers factors such as each spouse’s contribution to the marriage, financial resources, and future earning potential (Minn. Stat. § 518.58).

North Dakota & South Dakota: Equitable Distribution

Both Dakotas follow equitable distribution but with slightly different judicial approaches. North Dakota’s courts have significant discretion in dividing assets based on a “fair and equitable” standard, while South Dakota’s courts lean toward equal division unless fairness dictates otherwise.

Iowa: Equitable Distribution with a Marital Fault Exception

Iowa also follows equitable distribution but allows courts to consider marital fault (such as infidelity or financial misconduct) in asset division. While rare, a spouse’s misconduct could impact how assets are divided.

Wisconsin: Community Property State

Wisconsin differs from the other states in that it follows a community property model. This means that all marital assets are presumed to be split 50/50 unless a compelling reason dictates otherwise. While courts can adjust the split for fairness, the starting point is an equal division of assets.

Key Difference:

Minnesota, Iowa, and the Dakotas use equitable distribution, while Wisconsin follows community property rules, favoring an automatic 50/50 split.

3. Spousal Maintenance (Alimony)

Minnesota: Case-by-Case Determination

Spousal maintenance (alimony) in Minnesota is determined based on a variety of factors, including each spouse’s financial need, ability to pay, duration of the marriage, and standard of living (Minn. Stat. § 518.552). Courts may grant temporary, rehabilitative, or permanent alimony. However, recent 2024 statutory changes have made it more difficult to secure permanent maintenance unless specific long-term financial disparities exist.

North Dakota & South Dakota: More Limited Spousal Support

North Dakota’s courts are reluctant to award long-term alimony, favoring rehabilitative support to help a spouse regain self-sufficiency. South Dakota also limits long-term spousal support, granting it primarily in cases of long marriages or significant income disparity.

Iowa: Rehabilitative and Traditional Alimony

Iowa courts are more willing to award traditional (permanent) alimony in cases where one spouse is unlikely to regain financial independence due to age or health. Rehabilitative alimony is also common, designed to support a spouse while they gain education or training.

Wisconsin: Temporary Focus

Wisconsin primarily grants temporary or rehabilitative alimony, with permanent awards being rare. Courts focus on helping the lower-earning spouse transition to financial independence rather than providing indefinite support.

Key Difference:

Minnesota allows for permanent alimony in some cases, whereas North Dakota, South Dakota, and Wisconsin lean toward temporary support. Iowa is more open to traditional alimony in long-term marriages.

4. Child Custody & Support

Minnesota: Best Interests Standard

Minnesota courts prioritize the best interests of the child, considering factors like stability, parental involvement, and the child’s relationship with each parent (Minn. Stat. § 518.17). Joint legal custody is common, but physical custody arrangements vary. Minnesota also follows the income shares model for child support calculations.

North Dakota & South Dakota: Similar Standards

Both Dakotas follow a best interests approach, but North Dakota has a presumption of shared custody if both parents are fit. South Dakota, by contrast, tends to favor one primary custodial parent while ensuring significant visitation for the other.

Iowa: Strong Joint Custody Preference

Iowa courts strongly favor joint physical custody, assuming it benefits the child unless proven otherwise. Like Minnesota, Iowa follows the income shares model for child support.

Wisconsin: Equal Placement Focus

Wisconsin courts prefer 50/50 placement whenever possible. The state’s child support calculations consider each parent’s income and the number of overnights spent with the child.

Key Difference:

Minnesota, Iowa, and Wisconsin strongly favor shared parenting, while South Dakota is slightly more inclined toward primary custody arrangements.

5. Divorce Waiting Periods & Residency Requirements

StateResidency RequirementWaiting Period
Minnesota180 daysNo mandatory waiting period after filing
North Dakota6 months60-day waiting period
South Dakota1 year60-day waiting period
Iowa1 year90-day waiting period
Wisconsin6 months120-day waiting period

Minnesota’s lack of a post-filing waiting period means divorces can be finalized more quickly than in Iowa or Wisconsin. However, the state does require six months of residency before filing.

Final Thoughts

Minnesota’s divorce laws are distinct in several ways:

  • It follows a strict no-fault divorce system.
  • It uses equitable distribution but allows flexibility in asset division.
  • Spousal maintenance is available on a long-term basis in some cases, unlike in the Dakotas or Wisconsin.
  • The best interests of the child guide custody, with a strong preference for shared parenting.
  • No post-filing waiting period, unlike Iowa and Wisconsin.

For individuals considering divorce in the Upper Midwest, understanding these differences is essential when planning your case. If you need specific legal guidance, consulting with an experienced family law attorney in your state is highly recommended.