Rule 308.04 – Joint Marital Agreement and Decree

May 13, 2021 | Family Law, Minnesota

The parties to any marital dissolution proceeding may use a combined agreement and judgment and decree. A judgment and decree that is subscribed to by each party before a notary public, or signed by each party under penalty of perjury pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 358.116, and contains a final conclusion of law with words to the effect that “the parties agree that the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law incorporate the complete and full agreement” shall, upon approval and entry by the court, constitute an agreement and judgment and decree for marriage dissolution for all purposes.

Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 308.04

Amended effective May 1, 2012; amended effective May 23, 2016.

Advisory Committee Comments-2007Amendment

Rule 308.04 is new. The rule allows parties in any marriage dissolution proceeding, whether commenced by petition or joint petition, to use a combined marital termination agreement and judgment and decree. The primary benefit of this procedure is to reduce the risk of discrepancy between the terms of a marital termination agreement and the judgment and decree it purports to authorize. This procedure should benefit both the parties and the court in streamlining the court procedure where the parties are in agreement. The rule permits the parties to use this procedure by agreement, but does not require its use.

The procedure in Rule 308.04 is similar to the procedure for use of combined Joint Petition, Agreement and Judgment and Decree under Rule 302.01(b)(2), but it is available in all cases where the parties agree on all issues (the Rule 302 procedure may be used only in cases not involving children).

The use of this procedure will result in the marital termination agreement becoming an integral part of the judgment and decree, which will render it a public record. To the extent the parties’ agreement contains confidential information, they should consider alternative methods of protecting that information, such as use of separate documents as provided for in Rule 308.03 so the agreement is not filed or the use of the confidentiality protection procedures contained in Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 11.

Advisory Committee Comment-2012 Amendment

Rule 308.02 refers to statutory notice. The legislature has established numerous forms of notice including those required by Minn. Stat. § 518.68. These requirements are met in a two-page notice form, which is known as Appendix A and labeled as FAM 301 on the state court website (www.mncourts.gov, under “Court Forms” click on “Other”).

Rule 308.04 allows parties in any marriage dissolution proceeding, whether commenced by petition or joint petition, to use a combined agreement and judgment and decree. The agreement is often termed a “marital termination agreement,” but that label is not required by the rule. The primary benefit of this procedure is to reduce the risk of discrepancy between the terms of a marital termination agreement and the judgment and decree it purports to authorize. This procedure should benefit both the parties and the court in streamlining the court procedure where the parties are in agreement. The rule permits the parties to use this procedure by agreement, but does not require its use.

The procedure in Rule 308.04 is similar to the procedure for use of a combined Joint Petition, Agreement and Judgment and Decree under Rule 302.01(b)(2), and is available in all cases where the parties agree on all issues.

The use of this procedure will result in the marital termination agreement becoming an integral part of the judgment and decree, which will render it a public record. To the extent the parties’ agreement contains confidential information, they should consider alternative methods of protecting that information, such as use of separate documents as provided for in Rule 308.03 so the agreement is not filed or the use of the confidentiality protection procedures contained in Minn. Gen. R. Prac. 11.

Advisory Committee Comment-2016 Amendment

The Court made numerous changes to the court rules in 2015 to allow use of signature under penalty of perjury in lieu of notarization for most court documents where notarization was previously required. These changes followed the 2014 adoption of Minn.358.116 (2014) (codifying 2014 Minn. Laws ch. 204, § 3). The advisory committee is not aware of any good reason to require that this form be signed before a notary public, and therefore recommends adding the joint marital agreement and decree to the list of forms for which verification under penalty of perjury in accordance with the statute is sufficient.

.