Finding Her Voice: Margaret’s Journey to Financial Independence

A Narrative Story of Kovacs v. Kovacs, 394 N.W.2d 593 (Minn. Ct. App. 1986)

Margaret Kovacs* sat at her kitchen table, staring at the stack of bills that seemed to grow taller each month. After twenty-three years of marriage, she found herself in an impossible situation. Her husband Robert had left her with mounting debts and financial chaos, yet the divorce decree required her to pay him spousal maintenance—money she simply didn’t have.

The weight of financial stress pressed down on Margaret’s shoulders daily. She had worked hard throughout their marriage, contributing to their shared life and dreams. Now, facing the reality of supporting herself while also paying Robert, she felt trapped and overwhelmed. The original divorce settlement seemed to ignore her current financial struggles, leaving her wondering how she could possibly move forward.

Margaret knew she needed help. The maintenance payments were draining what little resources she had left, making it nearly impossible to rebuild her life. She felt anxious about her future and frustrated that the system seemed to work against her recovery. Every month brought the same crushing realization—she couldn’t afford to pay Robert while also covering her basic living expenses.

When Margaret decided to seek a modification of the maintenance order, she felt a glimmer of hope for the first time in months. She gathered her financial documents, showing the court exactly how the current arrangement was affecting her ability to survive. Her voice grew stronger as she explained her situation, no longer willing to accept a financial burden that prevented her from moving forward.

The Court of Appeals listened to Margaret’s concerns and recognized the unfairness of her situation. They understood that requiring her to pay maintenance while she struggled financially served no one’s best interests. The court’s decision brought Margaret the relief she desperately needed—they terminated the spousal maintenance obligation entirely.

Margaret felt a wave of validation wash over her as she learned of the court’s ruling. Finally, someone understood her struggle and recognized that she deserved the chance to rebuild her financial stability. The decision gave her permission to focus on her own recovery without the burden of supporting her former husband.

With the maintenance obligation lifted, Margaret could breathe again. She felt empowered to take control of her finances and excited about the possibilities ahead. The court’s decision didn’t just change her monthly budget—it restored her confidence and gave her the foundation she needed to create a stable, independent future.

*This story is based on the true facts of the appellate court’s decision, but the personal experiences and emotions described are a fictional representation to bring the case to life.

Question: How do I prove that something I own is nonmarital property?

Answer: Proving nonmarital property is very complex and challenging because of issues like mixing property together, efforts to increase property value, and separating income from appreciation.

Nonmarital claims and nonmarital tracing present some of the most complex and challenging issues faced by divorcing parties, attorneys, and judges. Appellate case law reflects this difficulty, as courts have wrestled with issues such as:

• commingling of nonmarital property with marital property;
• efforts by one or both spouses to increase the value of nonmarital property;
• control and accessibility of nonmarital property during a marriage; and
• parsing income produced by nonmarital property from appreciation of nonmarital property.

All of these issues arise against a statutory backdrop that favors characterizing property as marital and seeks equity between divorcing spouses. As a result, the case law is sometimes inconsistent or confused. This chapter aims to reconcile the cases with their statutory underpinnings.

Question: When do marital and nonmarital property rules apply?

Answer: Marital and nonmarital property rules only apply during divorce, legal separation, or annulment cases, not in other situations like probate court.

“Marital property” and “nonmarital property” have meaning only within dissolution, legal separation, or annulment proceedings. Unlike community property states (where “community” vs. “separate” may matter in probate), Minnesota’s marital/nonmarital designations do not apply in probate; they operate solely in proceedings to legally terminate a marriage and are defined by statute.

Question: What is considered marital property in Minnesota?

Answer: Marital property includes almost everything acquired during marriage, and there’s a strong assumption that property belongs to both spouses unless proven otherwise.

The statutory definition of “marital property” has been characterized as expansive. Janssen v. Janssen, 331 N.W.2d 752, 755 (Minn. 1983).

“Marital property” means property, real or personal, including vested public or private pension plan benefits or rights, acquired by the parties, or either of them, to a dissolution, legal separation, or annulment proceeding at any time during the existence of the marriage relation between them, or at any time during which the parties were living together as husband and wife under a purported marriage relationship which is annulled in an annulment proceeding, but prior to the date of valuation under section 518.58, subdivision 1. All property acquired by either spouse subsequent to the marriage and before the valuation date is presumed to be marital property regardless of whether title is held individually or by the spouses in a form of co-ownership such as joint tenancy, tenancy in common, tenancy by the entirety, or community property. Each spouse shall be deemed to have a common ownership in marital property that vests not later than the time of the entry of the decree in a proceeding for dissolution or annulment. The extent of the vested interest shall be determined and made final by the court pursuant to section 518.58. If a title interest in real property is held individually by only one spouse, the interest in the real property of the non-titled spouse is not subject to claims of creditors or judgment or tax liens until the time of entry of the decree awarding an interest to the non-titled spouse. The presumption of marital property is overcome by a showing that the property is nonmarital property.
Minn. Stat. § 518.003, subd. 3b.

Question: What types of property are considered nonmarital property?

Answer: Nonmarital property includes gifts from others, property owned before marriage, property received in exchange for nonmarital property, property acquired after separation, and property excluded by prenuptial agreement.

As noted, the presumption of marital property may be overcome by showing the property is nonmarital. The statute defines nonmarital property as follows:

“Nonmarital property” means property, real or personal, acquired by either spouse before, during, or after the existence of their marriage, which:

1. is acquired as a gift, bequest, devise, or inheritance made by a third party to one but not to the other spouse;
2. is acquired before the marriage;
3. is acquired in exchange for, or is the increase in value of, property described in clauses (a), (b), (d), and (e);
4. is acquired by a spouse after the valuation date; or
5. is excluded by a valid antenuptial contract.