Wiliams Divorce & Family Law Logo

CAN WE HELP?Request your free 30 minute consultOR CALL US AT 651-332-7650

  • Home
  • Our Staff
    • Attorney Gerald O. Williams
    • Paralegal Jocelyn Daul
  • Practice Areas
    • Alimony
    • Child Custody
    • Child Support
    • Collaborative Divorce
    • Divorce
    • International Custody
    • Interstate Custody
    • LGBTQIA+ Divorce & Custody
    • Mediation
  • Billing
    • Billing FAQ
    • Flat Fee Divorce
  • Blog
  • Clients
    • Making Payments
  • About Us
    • Contact Us
    • Directions to Williams Divorce and Family Law
    • Resources
    • Privacy Policy

Legal Separation

Posted by Gerald Williams 
· January 11, 2020 
· No Comments

An action for legal separation is similar to an action for marriage dissolution (a/k/a divorce), except that a legal separation does not break the bonds of matrimony. Therefore, the parties remain married.

The legal separation is often confused with people who are separated pending a divorce. When a couple is getting divorced, and during the divorce they are separated, this is not a legal separation. (There is nothing illegal about their separation, but it is not a legal separation.)

When a couple seeks a legal separation instead of a divorce, typically it is for one of three reasons: (1) Residency; (2) Spiritual Concerns; (3) Substantive Issues.

(1) Residency. There is no residency requirement for a legal separation. In Minnesota, there is a 180-day residency requirement for a marriage dissolution. So, if someone has not resided in Minnesota for 180 days, but would like some form of relief, they may pursue a legal separation. (Note: in such instances, it may be more sound to simply seek the marriage dissolution as soon as the residency requirement is met.)

(2) Spiritual Concerns. If one or both spouses is concerned that dissolving the marriage is a spiritually unacceptable option (due to one’s personal emphasis on the sanctity of marriage), they may seek a legal separation to balance the interests of separating from their spouse and not breaching the marital vows. Since only one spouse would need to declare that the marriage is irretrievably broken in order for the family court to grant a divorce, a legal separation in this circumstance would require that either both spouses stand by the principle of not pursuing a divorce, or at least that one spouse respects the principles adhered to by the other spouse.

(3) Substantive Issues. In decades past, there were certain pension programs that simply would not pay benefits to a former spouse. (Examples: police pensions, firefighters pensions.) Therefore, the couple would have to stay married because otherwise the spouse of the pension participant would be deprived of their marital interest in the pension. That issue has not presented itself in the last 15 to 25 years. But more recently, a parallel issue has arisen with health insurance. In recent years, it is more common that a former spouse is not entitled to health insurance benefits than it was five or ten years ago. That said, a couple concerned about this issue should be sure to explore the options available in the event of divorce, and to compare and contrast what policies or programs might offer versus continuation coverage through their existing provider.

One reason NOT to pursue a legal separation is as a means to provide their spouse with a wake-up call, and make them change their ways, and/or to bring about a reconciliation. When reconciliation is successful, it is almost always with the help of a therapist or counselor, and through lots of effort and commitment on the part of both spouses. Using a legal separation essentially as an ultimatum is both procedurally and substantively improper. It is procedurally inappropriate because the family court process should be used for marriage dissolutions and proper legal separations, not for veiled efforts to reconcile. It is substantively improper because the terms of a legal separation are permanent and final; therefore, the relief should not be sought from the court if it is not meant to be permanent and final.

No Comments
Categories : General Family Law
Previous Post →
← Next Post

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Recent Posts

  • Child Support and Alimony Arrears
  • Spousal Maintenance Payments Are Not Deductible From Taxable Income
  • Interesting Perspective on Divorce, Mediation and Collaborative Law
  • Independence of Provisions for Parenting Time and Child Support
  • Name Change in Divorce

Categories

  • Alimony / Spousal Maintenance (8)
  • Child Custody (42)
  • Child Support (21)
  • Co-parenting (1)
  • Court of Appeals (2)
  • Divorce (45)
  • Financial Issues (2)
  • General Family Law (53)
  • Guardian ad litem (6)
  • Interstate issues (2)
  • LGBTQIA Divorce (5)
  • Mediation (5)
  • Mental Health (3)
  • Parenting Plans (1)
  • Parenting Time (17)
  • Parenting time expeditor (3)
  • Uncategorized (37)
  • Uncontested Divorce (6)
Copyright © 2025 Williams Divorce & Family Law All Rights Reserved. | Privacy Policy

The content of this website is for general informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice or an attorney-client relationship. To establish an attorney-client relationship with Williams Divorce & Family Law requires a retainer agreement signed by you and attorney Gerald O. Williams.

Minnesota divorce attorney, Gerald O. Williams, represents clients in divorce and family law primarily in the communities of Woodbury, St. Paul, Minneapolis, Eagan, Inver Grove Heights, Cottage Grove, Maplewood, Oakdale, Lake Elmo, and Stillwater, as well as the greater seven county metro area including Washington, Ramsey, Hennepin, Dakota, Anoka, Scott, and Carver.