Minnesota Overhauls Partition Laws With the 2025 Minnesota Partition Act

For the first time in 120 years, the Minnesota legislature has enacted a comprehensive overhaul of its laws on the partition of real property with the new Minnesota Partition Act. See Minn. Stat. § 558A.01. The Act will replace the existing partition law found in Minn. Stat. Chapter 558 for all partition actions commenced on or after August 1, 2025.

A partition is a legal proceeding that allows co-owners of real property to divide their interests, either by physically dividing the property (partition in kind) or by selling the property and dividing the proceeds (partition by sale). The Minnesota Partition Act represents a significant modernization of Minnesota partition law, shifting from outdated procedural requirements to a more flexible, outcome-focused approach that prioritizes fairness and maximum value for all parties. The most significant of these changes includes expanded judicial discretion, detailed decision-making factors, modernized sale procedures, updated notice requirements and conduct-based cost allocation.

Expanded Judicial Discretion

The new statute gives courts significantly more flexibility in choosing between partitions in kind and partitions by sale. Under the prior law, a partition in kind was the default and a partition by sale was only allowed “if it appear[ed] that a partition cannot be had without great prejudice to the owners.” Minn. Stat. § 558.01. This created a higher bar for forcing a sale as opposed to a partition in kind even though partitions in kind are rarely used today given that they are typically only suitable for agricultural or other vacant lands.

Minn. Stat. § 558A.03 now gives courts more discretion in choosing between partition in kind and partition by sale by explicitly allowing the court to choose between “a sale of all, or part of the interest being partitioned and division of the proceeds according to the rights and interests of the interested parties, a partition in kind, or any other fair and equitable remedy.” This change gives judges the flexibility to craft creative solutions better tailored to each case’s unique circumstances rather than being constrained by outdated statutory presumptions.

Detailed Decision-Making Factors

The new Act provides courts with broad equitable powers and establishes specific factors for determining when a partition in kind would cause “manifest prejudice.” The previous statute lacked detailed guidance, forcing parties to rely on dated common law precedents to argue for the equitable division of property and proceeds. Minn. Stat. § 558A.04 now explicitly grants courts expansive authority to achieve “fair and equitable” results through a partition, enabling case-by-case determinations to address individual situations more appropriately. At the same time, Minn. Stat. § 558A.03 directs the court to use its equitable powers to conduct partitions in a manner that is “fair and equitable” to all parties.

Perhaps most significantly, the new law establishes detailed factors that courts “shall” consider when determining whether a partition in kind would result in “manifest prejudice” to the co-owners. Minn. Stat. § 558A.11 sets the following factors:

1. whether the property practicably can be divided among the cotenants;
2. whether partition in kind would apportion the property in such a way that the aggregate fair market value of the parcels resulting from the division would be materially less than the value of the property if it were sold as a whole, taking into account the condition under which a court-ordered sale likely would occur;
3. evidence of the collective duration of ownership or possession of the property by a cotenant and one or more predecessors in title or predecessors in possession to the cotenant who are or were relatives of the cotenant or each other;
4. a cotenant’s sentimental attachment to the property, including any attachment arising because the property has ancestral or other unique or special value to the cotenant;
5. the lawful use being made of the property by a cotenant and the degree to which the cotenant would be harmed if the cotenant could not continue the same use of the property;
6. the degree to which the cotenants have contributed their pro rata share of the property taxes, insurance, and other expenses associated with maintaining ownership of the property or have contributed to the physical improvement, maintenance, or upkeep of the property; and
7. any other relevant factor.

The third and fourth of these factors represent a significant change in how family property is protected under Minnesota partition law, making it harder to divide up generational family land, property with ancestral significance, or property to which a party simply has a significant sentimental attachment. However, Minn. Stat. § 558A.11 explicitly requires courts to conduct a balancing test, ensuring no single factor can be dispositive “without weighing the totality of all relevant factors and considerations.” Minn. Stat. § 558A.11(b).

Modernized Sale Procedures and Professional Standards

The new statute modernizes sale procedures by eliminating an outdated auction preference and expanding the authority of “referees,” i.e., the individuals a court appoints to prepare a property for sale or division in a partition lawsuit. Under the old statute, the default method for selling property in a partition by sale was by “public auction to the highest bidder for cash, upon published notice.” Minn. Stat. § 558.17. But selling property by public auction often fails to achieve optimal pricing in modern real estate markets. Minn. Stat. § 558A.10 now states that a referee may “sell the property by any means to assure the highest and best price, under the most favorable terms.”

The new law also provides flexibility in referee appointments, as Minn. Stat. § 558A.10 specifically authorizes courts to appoint “at least one, but no more than three disinterested and judicious persons as referees” instead of the previous default requirement of three referees. Additionally, Minn. Stat. § 558A.10 allows referees to “engage appraisers, real estate brokers or agents, legal counsel, cleaning services, contractors, and other professionals” to maximize property value, establishing higher standards for property preparation and marketing.

Improved Notice and Service Requirements

The Act also enhances procedural protections through comprehensive notice requirements. Minn. Stat. § 558A.06 and § 558A.07 contain detailed requirements for what must be included in the pleadings in a partition lawsuit as well as how a plaintiff must serve those pleadings. For example, if a party cannot be found for personal service, a plaintiff must “post a conspicuous sign on the property” with information about the litigation. Minn. Stat. § 558A.06, Subd. 2. These notice procedures are intended to ensure that all potentially interested parties receive proper notice of a partition lawsuit.

Conduct-Based Cost Allocation

The new statute also includes provisions aimed at reducing a co-owner’s ability to unnecessarily increase the costs associated with partitioning a property. These provisions are especially important in partition actions given that these lawsuits often arise out of family disputes or other similar situations where co-owners cannot agree on the terms of a sale or division of the property they own together.

Under the new statute, “[i]f a court determines that the parties will not cooperate in a sale or division of the property, the court shall empower the referee with all authority to execute all documents to conclude the sale or partition in kind.” Minn. Stat. § 558A.14. Aside from empowering a referee to close a sale without the co-owners’ permission, the Act also gives courts the authority to allocate attorney’s fees and costs based on “the actions of the parties necessitating the partition” and “the conduct and cooperation of the parties to the partition.” Minn. Stat. § 558A.19. The Act, therefore, provides a strong incentive for the parties to work together in good faith by allowing the court to penalize uncooperative parties.

This legislation represents the most significant modernization of Minnesota partition law in over a century. Fredrikson’s real estate attorneys regularly assist clients in navigating changing legal requirements like the new Minnesota Partition Act. If you have questions about the implications of these new legal requirements, please contact attorney Christian Hokans.

Co-authored by Jocie R. Scherkenbach, Summer Associate