Minnesota law requires that the division of a marital estate to be “fair and equitable.” The law does not require the division to be EQUAL. But often equal is fair, and anything other than equal is not fair. Here is why: if the parties reach an out-of-court settlement, they will negotiate the terms. Both spouses will have to assent to the agreement. It would not be surprising for the wife to be unwilling to accept less than half. It would not be surprising for the husband to be unwilling to accept less than half. Consequently, many out-of-court settlements constitute a 50-50 division of the property, which a reviewing court judge would find is consistent with the “fair and equitable” requirement.
Similarly, if the case goes to trial, for the court to decide, it would not be surprising for the court to find no reason to award the wife more than half, and it would not be surprising for the court to find no reason to award the husband more than half. Consequently, many court decisions reflect a 50-50 division of the property, which would pass muster by a reviewing appellate court as consistent with the “fair and equitable” requirement.
In neither instance is the 50-50 division REQUIRED.
Conversely, a division of property that is OTHER THAN fifty-fifty may be consistent with the “fair and equitable” requirement, but the basis for that conclusion will need to be spelled out in more detail, because on its face it may appear to favor one party over the other. This need for more detailed provisions for the non-equal-but-fair-and-equitable division goes for both out-of-court settlements and court-ordered divisions.
It would not be surprising for the husband to be unwilling to accept less than half. Consequently, many out-of-court settlements constitute a 50-50 division of the property, which a reviewing court judge would find is consistent with the “fair and equitable” requirement.