Legal Question in Family Law in Minnesota

Thank you for your question. A party cannot simply go to the court and request the appointment of a Guardian ad Litem. A guardian can only be appointed pursuant to a motion, and one will not ordinarily be appointed unless there is an issue about the the welfare of children, conflict between the parties that may affect the children, allegations of abuse, etc. These issues can only be raised in the context of a post-decree motion to modify custody or parenting time; the court will not appoint a guardian to represent the children unless there is such a motion. (A Guardian ad Litem is someone who acts as a representative of another person, a child for example, in a legal proceeding. Strictly speaking, a guardian is not an investigator or custody evaluator, although they will typically have a voice in the proceeding, and some will take on greater fact finding responsibility, whether or not they are directed to do so. If there is no legal proceeding, such as a post decree motion to modify custody or parenting time, then a guardian cannot be appointed.)

Your former spouse may be concerned you will be moving out of state if you are married, and his threat to have a guardian appointed is likely just an expression of his opposition to what he considers to be an impending move. If that occurs, you will be required to have either your former husband's permission to move, or will have to obtain permission from the court. That can be a rather difficult issue, since the law governing moves out of state was changed in 2006. The law formerly gave the primary physical custodian an almost automatic right to move (typically called the "Auge" presumption). That presumption was specifically removed by the legislature in its 2006 amendment to section 518.175 of the dissolution statute. The law now requires the court to determine whether a move is appropriate upon consideration of the "best interest" factors enumerated elsewhere in the statute. Since these factors tend to favor stability and continuity of care, it can sometimes appear there is a presumption against moves out of state. Although that is not the law, it is clear that move issues are now decidedly more complicated and difficult to resolve, and are more likely to result in a contested hearing.

Good luck.