Can the Duration of Spousal Maintenance Be Changed in Minnesota, and What Circumstances Might Justify Extending or Ending It?

Spousal maintenance is rarely a simple matter of monthly payments—it carries with it the question of how long those payments should last. In Minnesota, the law does allow for changes to the duration of spousal maintenance, but the rules for doing so depend heavily on what kind of maintenance was originally ordered—and whether the facts have changed since.

In cases involving both transitional and indefinite maintenance, the stakes are high for both the paying and receiving spouses. The law is flexible, but it’s also demanding. As we see in several real cases, the key issue is always whether a change in circumstances makes the original award “unreasonable and unfair.”

When Self-Sufficiency Fails: Hecker v. Hecker

When Deanna* Hecker and Martin* Hecker finalized their divorce, the court ordered transitional maintenance to help Deanna get back on her feet. The idea was simple: she’d pursue employment, build independence, and the payments would taper off.

But over time, it became clear that Deanna wasn’t progressing—and not just because of bad luck. She hadn’t taken meaningful steps to become self-supporting. Still, she argued for an extension of spousal maintenance.

The court’s analysis in Hecker v. Hecker, 568 N.W.2d 705 (Minn. 1997), was instructive: even when a court imputes income to a spouse based on earning capacity, it may still convert transitional maintenance to indefinite if “a spouse may not have any prospect of being self-supporting.” In other words, if the reality shows there’s no path to financial independence, the court may step in—regardless of what the original plan was.

This case highlights the complexity of modifying transitional maintenance. If the paying spouse questions the receiving spouse’s finances or efforts to become self-sufficient, an evidentiary hearing can be crucial to assess credibility and dig into the facts.

When Circumstances Change: Kemp and Evans

But what about indefinite maintenance? That label sounds permanent—but it’s not immune from change.

When indefinite maintenance is granted, the burden shifts: now, it’s the paying spouse who must show that a significant change warrants ending or reducing the duration of support.

In Evans v. Evans, 672 N.W.2d 232 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003), the court affirmed this idea, noting that “if the circumstances that supported the original award have changed, there is nothing to prohibit modification of an indefinite award of spousal maintenance.”

This can include a receiving spouse gaining meaningful employment, receiving an inheritance, or otherwise becoming self-supporting. In some cases, it may be the paying spouse’s retirement that triggers the request for change, though courts carefully examine whether the retirement is reasonable and undertaken in good faith.

Similarly, in Kemp v. Kemp, 608 N.W.2d 916 (Minn. Ct. App. 2000), the court emphasized that indefinite maintenance remains open to modification where facts on the ground no longer match the original assumptions. The Honke v. Honke, 960 N.W.2d 261 (Minn. 2021) decision echoed this theme, noting that courts must evaluate post-decree changes holistically—even when dealing with seemingly permanent awards.

What This Means for You

Whether you’re paying or receiving spousal maintenance, you should know: the duration of maintenance can be changed—but only when the facts support that change, and the legal standard is met.

For indefinite maintenance, the paying spouse must show a substantial change—like retirement or the recipient’s improved financial standing. For transitional maintenance, the receiving spouse bears the burden to show that something has gone wrong—such as illness, a failed rehabilitation effort, or unforeseen setbacks that prevent self-sufficiency.

It’s not enough to simply say the situation feels unfair. Courts will need evidence. And in close calls—such as when one spouse seems to have avoided efforts at self-sufficiency—a judge may choose to impute income based on earning capacity, or even switch the award from transitional to indefinite if appropriate.

The best way to navigate these complexities? Stay informed, and work with a professional who understands both the legal doctrine and the human realities of spousal maintenance. Because while the statute provides a framework, every case ultimately comes down to your story.

📚 Citations

• Minn. Stat. § 518A.39 (2024) – (Allows modification of spousal maintenance if a substantial change in circumstances renders the existing award unreasonable and unfair.)
• Hecker v. Hecker, 568 N.W.2d 705 (Minn. 1997) – (Even when income is imputed, the court may award indefinite maintenance if a spouse has no realistic prospect of self-support.)
• Evans v. Evans, 672 N.W.2d 232 (Minn. Ct. App. 2003) – (An indefinite maintenance award may be modified if the supporting circumstances have changed.)
• Kemp v. Kemp, 608 N.W.2d 916 (Minn. Ct. App. 2000) – (Supports the modifiability of indefinite maintenance based on changing circumstances.)
• Honke v. Honke, 960 N.W.2d 261 (Minn. 2021) – (Affirms court’s authority to consider post-decree changes when evaluating spousal maintenance modifications.)

*The identities of these parties and facts of their matter were publicly published and thus not confidential. While the case holding and statutory references are accurate, creative liberty has been imposed for the emotional portrayal of the parties.