Grandparent Visitation Petition - Minnesota

IMPORTANT: PREPARATION GUIDE — NOT THE OFFICIAL COURT FORM

Minnesota provides official Judicial Branch forms for third-party / grandparent visitation matters.
This template provides the substantive legal content to help you prepare — confirm and use current
Minnesota Judicial Branch forms (mncourts.gov) and local district court requirements before filing.

STATE OF MINNESOTA

DISTRICT COURT

[COUNTY] COUNTY — [____] JUDICIAL DISTRICT

PETITION FOR GRANDPARENT VISITATION

(Minn. Stat. § 257C.08)

NOW COMES the Petitioner, [PETITIONER FULL LEGAL NAME], and respectfully petitions this Court pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 257C.08 for an order granting reasonable visitation with the minor child named above, and states as follows:

1. PARTIES

1.1 Petitioner (Grandparent)

1.2 Co-Petitioner (if applicable)

1.3 Respondent(s) (Parent(s) / Custodian(s))

1.4 Minor Child

2. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2.1 Subject-Matter Jurisdiction. The District Court has jurisdiction to grant reasonable grandparent visitation under Minn. Stat. § 257C.08.

2.2 UCCJEA. Visitation is a child-custody proceeding under Minn. Stat. § 518D.102. Identify the jurisdictional basis under §§ 518D.102 and 518D.201 (check one):

☐ The child has lived in Minnesota with a parent or person acting as a parent for at least six (6) consecutive months immediately before commencement of this proceeding, counting any temporary absence;

☐ The child is less than six (6) months old and has lived in Minnesota since birth;

☐ Other jurisdictional basis under ch. 518D: [____________]

2.3 Venue. The proposed filing county is [COUNTY] because [IDENTIFY THE EXISTING FAMILY CASE OR APPLICABLE VENUE BASIS]. Confirm the correct court and case number before filing.

2.4 Other Proceedings; six-month bar (Subd. 2(b)). (check one): ☐ No prior grandparent-visitation motion concerning this child has been heard and denied. ☐ A prior motion was heard and denied on [__/__/____]; more than six (6) months have elapsed, or the parties have agreed in writing to an earlier filing.

2.5 No combination with OFP (Subd. 8). This visitation proceeding is not combined with any proceeding for an Order for Protection under Minn. Stat. ch. 518B.

3. STANDING (Minn. Stat. § 257C.08)

Petitioner has standing to seek visitation because ONE OR MORE of the following statutory grounds applies (check all that apply):

☐ Subd. 1 — Deceased parent. A parent of the unmarried minor child is deceased, and Petitioner is a parent or grandparent of the deceased parent;

☐ Subd. 2 — Family court proceeding. A proceeding for dissolution, custody, legal separation, annulment, or parentage involving the child has been commenced, or has been completed, and Petitioner is the parent or grandparent of a party to that proceeding;

☐ Subd. 3 — Prior residence with grandparent. The unmarried minor child resided with Petitioner (a grandparent or great-grandparent) for a period of twelve (12) months or more and was subsequently removed from the home by the child's parent(s).

☐ Subd. 6 — Stepparent adoption. The child was adopted by a stepparent, and Petitioner is the grandparent of a deceased parent or of a parent whose parental relationship ended under the adoption decree. Identify decree and facts: [____________].

3.1 Adoption limit (Subds. 5-6). (check one): ☐ No adoption. ☐ Stepparent adoption and subdivision 6 applies. ☐ Grandparent adoption; explain the applicable statutory route: [____________]. A non-stepparent, non-grandparent adoption ends visitation rights under this section. If subdivision 6 applies, explain why the requested visits serve the child and will not interfere with the parent-child relationship: [____________].

4. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

4.1 History of the relationship and prior personal contact. [DESCRIBE — the amount and quality of personal contact between Petitioner and the child prior to this application; periods the child resided with Petitioner; caregiving, activities, holidays, and milestones; the depth of the bond. Subdivisions 1 and 2 require the Court to consider prior personal contact.]

[____________]

4.2 Circumstances leading to this Petition. [DESCRIBE — when and how contact ceased or was curtailed; reasons given; informal efforts to resolve]:

[____________]

4.3 Best interests. [DESCRIBE why the requested visitation is in the child's best interests — see the facts in Section 6]:

[____________]

4.4 Non-interference with the parent-child relationship. [DESCRIBE why the requested visitation will not interfere with the parent-child relationship; how the schedule respects the parents' time, rules, and decisions; Petitioner's commitment to supporting the parent-child bond]:

[____________]

4.5 Child's preference (if of sufficient age and maturity). (check one): ☐ The child has expressed a preference: [____________] ☐ The child is too young to express a meaningful preference.

5. CONSTITUTIONAL AND STATUTORY STANDARD

5.1 Parental rights; special weight (Troxel). A fit parent has a fundamental constitutional right to make decisions concerning the care, custody, and control of the child, and a fit custodial parent's decision regarding grandparent visitation is entitled to special weight. Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000).

5.2 Minnesota statutory standard (§ 257C.08). Upon a qualifying statutory ground, the Court may grant reasonable visitation only if it finds that (1) visitation is in the best interests of the child, AND (2) the visitation would not interfere with the parent-child relationship. Subdivisions 1 and 2 also require the Court to consider prior personal contact; describe it regardless of the route used.

5.3 Burden of proof. The petitioner bears the burden of proving the statutory basis and findings. To protect the fit custodial parent's decision, the petitioner must prove by clear and convincing evidence that the proposed visits will not interfere with the parent-child relationship. Soohoo v. Johnson, 731 N.W.2d 815, 823 (Minn. 2007); Givens v. Darst, 800 N.W.2d 652, 656 (Minn. App. 2011).

5.4 Interference finding. Petitioner must show that the requested visitation would not interfere with the parent-child relationship under the applicable constitutional standard. The Revisor note to § 257C.08 states that subdivision 7 was held unconstitutional in Soohoo v. Johnson; its preponderance language is not an operative basis for relief.

6. FACTS SUPPORTING VISITATION (Minn. Stat. § 257C.08)

Describe the facts supporting the required visitation findings. Attach additional pages if needed.

Prior personal contact with the child (dates, frequency, activities, and any caregiving): [____________]

Why the proposed visits serve the child's best interests (the child's relationship with Petitioner and concrete benefits of the proposed schedule): [____________]

Why the proposed visits would not interfere with the parent-child relationship (timing, exchanges, parental routines, and any safeguards): [____________]

The custodial parent's position on visitation and Petitioner's response: [____________]

7. REQUESTED VISITATION SCHEDULE

7.1 Regular visitation. ☐ Weekly — [SPECIFY] ☐ Bi-weekly — [SPECIFY] ☐ Monthly — [SPECIFY] ☐ Other — [____________]

7.2 Holidays and special occasions.

7.3 Communication. ☐ Telephone — [frequency] ☐ Video calls — [frequency] ☐ Mail/cards

7.4 Transportation / exchange. ☐ Petitioner will provide transportation ☐ Exchange location: [____________]

8. PRAYER FOR RELIEF

WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that this Court:

A. Find that Petitioner has standing under Minn. Stat. § 257C.08;

B. Find, giving special weight to the fit custodial parent's decision, that the requested visitation is in the child's best interests and that Petitioner has proved by clear and convincing evidence it will not interfere with the parent-child relationship;

C. Enter an order granting Petitioner reasonable visitation on the schedule set forth in Section 7, or as the Court deems appropriate;

D. Grant Petitioner reasonable telephone, video, and written communication with the child;

E. Grant such other and further relief as the Court deems just and proper.

9. VERIFICATION

I, [PETITIONER NAME], have read this Petition, including its factual allegations.

I declare under penalty of perjury that everything I have stated in this document is true and correct.

Signature: _________________________________

Print Name: [PETITIONER NAME]

Signed on [__/__/____] in [COUNTY] County, Minnesota.

10. SIGNATURE

Respectfully submitted,

Date: [__/__/____]

_________________________________
[PETITIONER NAME], Petitioner (Pro Se)

— or —

_________________________________
[ATTORNEY NAME] (Atty. Reg. No. [____________])
[FIRM NAME]
[ADDRESS]
[TELEPHONE] | [EMAIL]
Attorney for Petitioner

11. NOTICE TO RESPONDENT

TO THE RESPONDENT(S): You have been served with a Petition for Grandparent Visitation under Minn. Stat. § 257C.08. Review the accompanying summons or hearing notice for the applicable response and appearance instructions. The Court may act on the petition after the required process and hearing. You may seek counsel.

12. CERTIFICATE / AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE

I certify that on [__/__/____], a copy of the foregoing Petition was served upon the following by the method indicated:

Respondent 1 — Name: [____________]; Address: [____________]; Method: ☐ Personal service ☐ U.S. mail ☐ Other: [____________]

Respondent 2 — Name: [____________]; Address: [____________]; Method: ☐ Personal service ☐ U.S. mail ☐ Other: [____________]

Signature: _________________________________

SOURCES & REFERENCES

• Minn. Stat. § 257C.08 — Rights of visitation to unmarried persons: deceased parent (subd. 1); family court proceedings and six-month bar (subd. 2); prior 12-month residence with grandparent (subd. 3); adoption exception (subd. 5); subdivision 7 is printed but identified by the Revisor as unconstitutional; no combination with ch. 518B (subd. 8). https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/257C.08
• Soohoo v. Johnson, 731 N.W.2d 815 (Minn. 2007) — Special weight and clear-and-convincing burden; subdivision 7 held unconstitutional.
• Givens v. Darst, 800 N.W.2d 652 (Minn. App. 2011) — Applies clear-and-convincing noninterference proof in a grandparent petition.
• Troxel v. Granville, 530 U.S. 57 (2000) — Fit parents' visitation decisions entitled to "special weight."
• Minn. Stat. §§ 518D.102 and 518D.201 — UCCJEA definitions and initial jurisdiction.
• Minnesota Judicial Branch forms: https://mncourts.gov/getforms