How Does a Minnesota Court Evaluate the Marital Standard of Living?

For many separating spouses, one of the most emotionally difficult realizations comes when they discover that life after divorce may not resemble the financial comfort they once knew—even if they each worked throughout the marriage.

Minnesota law acknowledges this tension. Minnesota Statutes section 518.552 instructs courts to consider a variety of factors when deciding whether to award spousal maintenance. Among them is the marital standard of living—a concept that recognizes the lifestyle the couple enjoyed together. But the law is also clear: this is just one factor, and it must be considered alongside the broader reality of each party’s financial position.

Still, in some cases, the marital standard of living plays a central role—becoming the very reason a court orders spousal support.

Chamberlain v. Chamberlain: A spouse who worked throughout the marriage may still receive maintenance if they cannot sustain the marital lifestyle alone

Samantha Chamberlain* worked her entire marriage. She wasn’t dependent in the traditional sense. She had a career, income, and self-discipline. But her life—like many—had been built around a shared financial reality with her husband. Vacations, savings, their home, their routines—all of it was possible because their incomes were combined. After their marriage ended, she found herself unable to maintain that standard of living on her own, despite being employed full-time.

Her husband may have felt the arrangement was fair—she had a job, after all. But the court saw a different picture.

The Minnesota Court of Appeals held that even though Samantha had been consistently employed, she was not fully self-supporting if she could not maintain the marital standard of living. The ruling recognized that a person’s work history does not automatically equate to financial sufficiency in a post-divorce world—especially when the marital lifestyle had been built on greater income than the obligee alone could earn.

This decision offered something rare and human in legal analysis: an acknowledgment that being employed doesn’t always mean being secure.

A Broader Lesson: Standard of Living Matters—but It’s Not Everything

Under Minn. Stat. § 518.552, courts are directed to consider the standard of living established during the marriage—but they must also weigh all relevant circumstances, including both parties’ financial needs and ability to support themselves. In most cases, it’s simply not feasible for both ex-spouses to maintain the same lifestyle they enjoyed while married.

Judges must balance past comfort with future feasibility.

There’s no formula that mandates lifestyle equality, nor a rule that guarantees spousal maintenance just because one party earned less. But when a spouse cannot sustain the marital standard of living—despite their best efforts to work and provide for themselves—that fact can justify ongoing support.

Still, this is not a guarantee. In many cases, courts may reduce expectations and aim for reasonable self-support, rather than a continuation of former comforts. Each case turns on its facts, but Chamberlain remains a powerful example of how the marital standard of living can be dispositive—even when employment exists.

Citations

• Minn. Stat. § 518.552 (2024) – In determining spousal maintenance, the court shall consider all relevant factors, including the standard of living established during the marriage.
• Chamberlain v. Chamberlain, 615 N.W.2d 405 (Minn. Ct. App. 2000) (A spouse may be awarded maintenance even if employed, if they cannot meet the marital standard of living).
• *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.