Can I get spousal maintenance in Minnesota if I’m capable of supporting myself?

We get this question a lot from clients and will-be clients. To give you a solid footing, consider this vignette from the most important court case on this question. 

When the marriage of Paula and David Sefkow* ended, it wasn’t just the end of a shared household—it was the beginning of two separate lives, each trying to find stability on new terms.

Divorce can be disorienting. For Paula, it likely meant trying to find her footing again: financially, emotionally, and practically. She had spent years as a homemaker and mother. Like many in her position, she may have wondered whether she’d be able to support herself after the divorce, especially as she looked after their young daughter. For David, the divorce may have brought its own strain: concern over how much support he would be expected to pay, and whether the financial demands would be fair given both parties’ capabilities.

The issue that made its way to the Minnesota Supreme Court was this: Should Paula receive spousal maintenance, or was she capable of supporting herself?

Under Minnesota law—specifically Minnesota Statutes section 518.552—spousal maintenance is a needs-based determination. The court looks at two key things:

• First, under subdivision 1(a), whether a spouse lacks sufficient property to meet their reasonable needs.
• Then, under subdivision 1(b), whether the spouse seeking support can meet their needs through income from appropriate employment.

This is where the Sefkow case became important. The court didn’t deny that Paula had been dependent on David during the marriage. But it found that she had the education, training, and opportunity to earn income going forward—and that her income potential, if realized, would allow her to meet her basic needs. Since Minnesota law says that spousal maintenance should not be awarded if the spouse can meet their needs from income, the maintenance award made by the trial court was reversed.

The Supreme Court also noted that the standard of living during the marriage and whether Paula was caring for a child who required her to stay home were relevant—but those factors didn’t outweigh her earning potential in this case.

This may have felt deeply unfair to Paula. She might have viewed her part-time teaching as a transitional phase, not as proof of long-term independence. And the burden of single parenting is real, especially when trying to rebuild a career at the same time. But the court focused on legal standards and the evidence available. In its eyes, the law had to follow a clear structure: spousal maintenance is not meant to equalize lifestyles; it’s meant to prevent hardship.

The ruling likely felt like a relief to David. Still, these outcomes are never emotionally easy. There’s always more going on beneath the surface of financial affidavits and courtroom transcripts.

Even today, this framework continues to shape divorce outcomes in Minnesota. The law has adapted in some ways—especially during the COVID-19 pandemic, when parenting and employment dynamics changed dramatically. For example, courts have paid more attention to cases where one parent’s caregiving responsibilities legitimately prevent them from working outside the home. What that means in a post-pandemic world is still evolving.

But Sefkow v. Sefkow remains a landmark case. It reminds us that courts must walk a careful line between respecting a spouse’s past role and acknowledging their future capacity. And it shows that behind every statutory factor is a real person, doing their best to move forward.

Citations & Disclaimers

• *The identities of these parties and facts of their matter were publicly published in the 1988 Minnesota Supreme Court decision: Sefkow v. Sefkow, 427 N.W.2d 203 (Minn. 1988). While the case holding and statutory references are accurate, creative liberty has been imposed for the emotional portrayal of the Sefkows. 
• Minn. Stat. § 518.552, subd. 1(a) (2024) – A court may grant spousal maintenance if the spouse lacks sufficient property, including allocated marital property, to provide for reasonable needs.
• Minn. Stat. § 518.552, subd. 1(b) (2024) – A court may grant spousal maintenance if the spouse is unable to provide adequate self-support through appropriate employment, considering the standard of living established during the marriage.
• Pandemic caregiving context discussed in contemporary family law scholarship; see generally Affecting Family Law in a Post-Pandemic World, 54 Fam. L.Q. 157 (2022).