Brainerd Minnesota Law Blog

Minnesota residents who watch shows like 'CSI" on television may be surprised to learn that questions have been raised about the validity of forensic evidence and the qualifications of the experts who provide it. After studying the way hairs, fingerprints and fibers are gathered and processed, a panel of scientists, academics and legal experts found problems with virtually every technique and concluded that the interpretation of forensic evidence is often based on subjective factors rather than science. Their findings were published in 2009 by the U.S. National Academy of Sciences.

The NAS report was especially critical of blood pattern analysis. This is a technique forensic experts use to determine the sequence of events at a crime scene based on blood drips, smears and splatter. The NAS experts found little in the way of solid science to back up BPA and discovered that its practitioners often lacked accreditation and proper training. Findings such as these are particularly worrying for groups advocating for criminal justice reform because juries tend to find this kind of evidence extremely convincing.

People in Minnesota may experience various conflicts and changes in their relationships. When people get married, they may intend to stay together for the rest of their lives. However, as people change and grow, they can find themselves at odds with their spouse. They may have conflicts over career or parenthood, or they may suffer issues with addiction, infidelity or even abuse. In other cases, they may simply find themselves growing in different directions, especially if they married at a younger age or experienced significant upheaval in their lives. There are some indicators that experts say reveal when couples are more likely to end their marriage.

Contempt is one issue cited as a common sign that divorce is in the future. For example, a spouse may not consider a partner at all in making decisions about major issues, like elective health procedures or a big career move. This can indicate that the spouses no longer see each other as an important factor in each other's lives or that they do not have respect for the other person's opinion. In other cases, contempt can be shown much more clearly, as when one spouse calls the other names, mocks them openly or speaks about them dismissively.

The Bankruptcy Abuse Prevention and Consumer Protection Act, which was signed into law in 2005, makes student loan debt exempt from discharge in most situations, and individuals who seek relief from educational loan obligations are generally required to establish undue hardship by passing the Brunner test. However, Minnesota is one of a handful of states where bankruptcy courts apply the totality of circumstances test instead of the Brunner test.

To pass the Brunner test, an individual's situation must meet three criteria. Making their required monthly student loan payments must not leave them enough money to enjoy even a minimal lifestyle, their situation must be unlikely to change significantly in the future, and they must have made good faith efforts to pay their debts. The Eighth Circuit, which includes the District of Minnesota, has ruled that this sets an unfairly strict standard and includes a good faith requirement that is not found in the bankruptcy code.

In Minnesota and across the United States, a growing number of older people are moving forward with a divorce. This is frequently called a "gray" divorce. The reasons for divorce can range from no longer having the same life goals to experiencing boredom, dissatisfaction and unhappiness. While the overall divorce rate has been in decline and is at its lowest point in four decades, people 55 and older are increasingly choosing to part ways.

There are unique challenges with gray divorce. Alimony is a common concern in any divorce, but older people are likely well advanced in their career. This can complicate the amount of alimony because the salary can have different aspects like bonuses and stocks in addition to salary. Since Minnesota is an equitable distribution state, the court seeks to come to a fair split, and it might not be 50-50. Assets and income can be impacted.