Does Minnesota Allow Couples To Cancel Their Divorce?
May 3, 2013 | Elizabeth A. SchadingIn Minnesota, once the court file has been opened, if neither you nor your spouse want to go through with the divorce, it is fairly easy to stop the divorce from proceeding up to the moment that the final divorce decree is signed. The initiator of the divorce can file to dismiss the petition, or both of you can file a joint petition for dismissal. [maxbutton id=”1″ ] Once you’ve filed the dismissal the divorce is over with and you can get on with the work of repairing your marriage. You can do this up until the divorce decree is signed because you are still married in the eyes of the law until that happens. You can’t do this after the divorce decree is signed, however. There’s no way to cancel the divorce as you’re no longer married under the law once this happens. At that point you’d need to get re-married. Another option, assuming the court file is open, is to put your divorce on “hold” or “inactive status”. This is accomplished by filing a stipulation that both parties wish to put the matter on hold. The court will generally wait 12 months, and if no action has been taken, the court file will be closed. Any new action will require re-filing. …
Read MoreWhat is Minnesota's “Dog Injury” Law?
May 1, 2013 | John T. BuchmanIt is spring in Minnesota (finally) and people are finding many ways to be back outdoors enjoying the sun and nicer weather. Unfortunately, this can also bring an increase in incidents involving animal attacks, specifically dog attacks and bites as man’s “best friends” head back outdoors along with him. Minnesota has long had a law that creates liability for dog owners whose “best friends” are decidedly unfriendly and bite or injure others. This is commonly referred to as the “dog bite” statute (Minn. Stat. § 347.22). This law was enacted in 1951. Under the statute, “If a dog, without provocation, attacks or injures any person who is acting peaceably in any place where that person may lawfully be, the owner of the dog is liable . . .” Thus, an injured person must establish that they did not provoke the dog, they were acting peaceably in a place where they might lawfully be and that their injuries were the “direct and immediate” result of the dog’s actions. This law only applies to dogs and not cats. There is a bill currently in the legislature to include cats but it is uncertain whether it will become law. The law also applies to anyone who is “harboring” the dog (which means actively caring for the…
Read More