§ 525.54

Minnesota Statutes

Source: 2025 Minnesota Statutes. For the official text, see revisor.mn.gov.

Citing Cases (13)

Minnesota Supreme Court

Matter of Blilie · 1993 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

In Re the Guardianship of Mikulanec · 1984 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Minnesota Court of Appeals

In Re Conservatorship of Smith · 2003 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

In Re Public Conservatorship of Foster · 1995 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Matter of Blilie · 1992 6 citations

I. Appellant contends that because the statutory provision under which her guardianship was commenced in 1952 has since been repealed, the guardianship has been terminated. Respondent challenges appellant's reading as overly simplistic and unable to survive close scrutiny. In its 1952 warrant of commitment, the court found appellant mentally deficient, and ordered that the Director of Public Institutions is hereby appointed guardian of the person of such patient, and that she is hereby committed to its care and custody according to law. The commitment provisions at that time were found at Minn. Stat. §§ 525.749-.79 (1949). Minn. Stat. § 525.753, subd. 2 (1949) stated: If the patient is found to be mentally deficient or epileptic, the court shall appoint the director guardian of his person *37 and commit him to the care and custody of such director. These provisions were repealed in 1968. 1967 Minn.Laws ch. 638, §§ 22, 23. Separate statutory provisions addressed the general powers and duties of guardians. See Minn. Stat. §§ 525.54-.612 (1949). These provisions are still in effect today. See Minn. Stat. §§ 525.539-.705 (1990 and Supp.1991); see also Minn. Stat. ch. 252A (1990) (public guardianship). Minn. Stat. §§ 525.749-.79 were repealed in 1968 and replaced by Minn. Stat. ch. 253A. 1967 Minn. Laws ch. 638, §§ 1-23. Chapter 253A included a savings clause, which addressed which law should govern commitments made under prior law: [A] proceeding for the commitment of a person to a hospital commenced before January 1, 1968 is governed by the law existing at the time the proceeding was commenced, and unless such proceedings are terminated within 12 months after January 1, 1968, they shall thereafter be governed by the provisions of sections 253A.01 to 253A.21. Minn. Stat. § 253A.21, subd. 7 (1967). Appellant contends that because chapter 253A contained no provisions for public guardianships and because under the savings clause, Minn. Stat. § 253A.21, subd. 7, her 1952 commitment became a commitment governed by chapter 253A, the Commissioner could no longer rely upon Minn. Stat. § 525.753, subd. 2 as the basis for the guardianship. We disagree. The savings clause does not provide that the guardianships of those individuals who were made public wards pursuant to section 525.753, subd. 2, were to be terminated. Instead, it addressed only the commitment status of previously committed individuals. The fact that the statute which created the guardianship was repealed does not mean the guardianships created by statutory provisions were terminated. This is particularly true when the powers and duties of the Commissioner as public guardian remained intact. See Minn. Stat. §§ 525.54-612 (1967); see also Minn. Stat. ch. 252A (1990). Further, Minn. Stat. § 253A.18, subd. 2 (1967) authorized the commencement of guardianship proceedings "before, during, or after commitment proceedings," and provided that such proceedings "may be conducted jointly with such commitment proceedings." With this provision, the legislature recognized that guardianships had been and would continue to be an adjunct to commitment. The adoption of chapter 253A merely established that guardianships of persons with developmental disabilities were to be governed pursuant to the guardianship provisions of Minn. Stat. §§ 525.54-.612 rather than by the commitment provisions. Chapter 253A in turn was repealed, and the current commitment statute, chapter 253B, was enacted. 1982 Minn.Laws ch. 581. Appellant contends the savings clause of chapter 253B addressed commitments, but again did not provide for the Commissioner to be guardian of appellant's person. Respondent contends that the savings clause refutes, rather than supports, appellant's argument. The legislature addressed the issue of individuals who were held under a guardianship, and required new commitment proceedings under chapter 253B. See In re Cieminski, 374 N.W.2d 289, 291 (Minn. App.1985), pet. for rev. denied (Minn. Nov. 18, 1985). The savings clause, which was amended twice, ultimately read, in relevant part, as follows: For persons 16 years or older, involuntarily residing in a regional center pursuant to an order of guardianship, and not committed pursuant to an order issued under Minnesota Statutes, chapter 253B, or Minnesota Statutes 1980, chapter 253A, the following review procedures will apply: (a) The person shall have a commitment hearing according to Minnesota Statutes, section 253B.08, prior to August 1, 1985. The head of the regional center shall notify the responsible county which shall initiate the petition for commitment. * * * * * * (c) A finding by the committing court that the individual does not satisfy the *38 commitment criteria of Minnesota Statutes, chapter 253B, shall not terminate the guardianship or constitute a restoration to capacity. An order of restoration to capacity may only be obtained under Minnesota Statutes, section 525.61.

+ 3 more citations in this opinion.

In Re Conservatorship of Lundgaard · 1990 2 citations

As a result of the 1980 legislation and a subsequent amendment raising the burden of persuasion, the legislature provided that in a proceeding for the involuntary appointment of a conservator, there is a legal presumption of capacity and the burden of proof is on the petitioner to prove, by clear and convincing evidence, that the proposed conservatee is incapacitated as defined in Minn. Stat. § 525.54 (1988). Minn. Stat. § 525.551, subds. 3, 5 (1988); 1982 Minn. Laws ch. 472. In addition, the legislature has mandated that